2.1
Evidence to the inquiry demonstrates a widespread recognition of the prevalence of family and domestic violence in the community and the importance of having measures in place to support employees who are experiencing domestic violence.
2.2
The majority of evidence to the inquiry expressed support for the intent of the Fair Work Amendment (Paid Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Bill 2022 (bill). A great many submitters expressed support for the bill in its entirety and urged the parliament to pass it without delay. Some business representatives expressed concern about the cost of implementing the measures and the practical operation of some provisions.
Prevalence of family and domestic violence
2.3
Submitters recognised the prevalence of family and domestic violence in the community and described the confronting reality it presents within Australian society, echoing the stark findings of the Fair Work Commission (FWC) in its Family and domestic violence (FDV) leave review 2021.
2.4
Submitters underscored that while the adverse impacts of family and domestic violence are felt widely in the community, and both men and women experience family and domestic violence, women are disproportionately affected by family and domestic violence:
From the age of 15, approximately one in four women, compared to one in 13 men, have experienced at least one incident of violence by an intimate partner.
Women in rural, regional and remote areas are 24 times more likely to be hospitalised as a result of domestic violence than women in major cities.
First Nations women are at least 32 times more likely to be hospitalised due to family and domestic violence than non-Indigenous women.
On average, one woman is killed by her current or former partner every 10 days in Australia.
Family and domestic violence is a workplace issue
2.5
Family and domestic violence can happen to anyone, regardless of their socio-economic and cultural background, affecting all aspects of their lives, including their workplace. More than 68 per cent of people experiencing family and domestic violence are in paid work and many of them are unable to escape violence without the risk of losing their job, experiencing financial stress, homelessness and poverty.
2.6
Contributors to the inquiry welcomed the Australian Government’s (government) recognition of family and domestic violence as ‘not just a criminal justice or social issue, but an economic and workplace issue’. Submitters emphasised the adverse impact that family and domestic violence can have on an employee’s attendance, performance and well-being at work. In particular, women experiencing family and domestic violence are more likely to have a more disrupted work history; be on lower personal incomes; change jobs frequently; and are more likely to be employed in casual and part-time work.
2.7
Support at work is critical to an affected employee’s ability to hold down a job and without the security of a job they can find themselves in a highly vulnerable and precarious financial position.
2.8
The committee also heard evidence to suggest that the workplace can play a significant role as a driver of cultural change, by raising awareness and normalising discourse around family and domestic violence.
The practical reality of escaping family and domestic violence
2.9
Submitters observed the myriad of practical and administrative matters that people experiencing family and domestic violence must navigate in attempting to extricate themselves from violent situations. These include: seeking medical attention; attending legal appointments; court and mediation sessions; securing housing and moving house; speaking with schools and childcare facilities; and changing financial accounts.
2.10
Attending appointments and accessing services requires extensive time and planning. Many services are only available during business hours and the unpredictability of availability of appointments, together with potential threats from the perpetrator of the violence, can further complicate the process of accessing services.
2.11
In rural and regional areas, the lack of ‘on-the-ground’ services to support victims of family and domestic violence and their children, the distances involved to access them, together with privacy considerations in small communities, pose additional challenges for individuals leaving violent situations. This situation is complicated further by practical considerations such as access to transport, where to go, and what to do with children.
2.12
The committee heard that all too often women become disconnected from support services because of their inability to access paid leave:
We have seen circumstances where women have been in the safe room at the courthouse being supported by Samantha and her colleagues, and they have their employer on the phone telling them that they've exhausted their leave entitlements and they need to return to work or they won’t have a job. These are not hypothetical situations; these are lived experiences.
The importance of maintaining paid employment
2.13
Evidence to the inquiry emphasised the importance of victims of family and domestic violence being able to maintain paid employment. Access to finances presents the most challenging barrier to individuals trying to leave violent situations. From the ability to demonstrate secure employment in order to secure a rental property through to being able to meet living costs for themselves and their family, access to paid FDV leave can significantly enhance a person’s ability to leave and start their recovery in a safe environment.
2.14
Relationships Australia stressed:
…the financial reality for most people seeking to leave a violent situation is that they’re in financial handcuffs, and they currently do have to choose. If they make the choice to take unpaid leave, that may mean that they can’t feed their kids for a day or more. That’s the reality of it, and that’s exacerbated by the fact that there is a preponderance of women in casual employment.
2.15
The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) described the importance of continuity of employment in reducing the recurrence rate of family and domestic violence as an affected individual ‘has confidence that there is a job to return to that will provide ongoing, secure work’.
2.16
Similarly, Professor Kate Fitz-Gibbon, Director of the Monash Gender and Family Violence Prevention Centre, noted the importance of maintaining paid employment throughout a person’s experience of family and domestic violence and throughout their recovery:
Research shows us that, on average, it takes seven to eight attempts to leave a relationship; it costs around $18,000; and it takes 141 hours to safely extricate oneself from an abuser. The economic benefits of paid employment are significant in the context of women's economic security and their ability to safely exit and maintain a life free from violence.
2.17
In reaching its decision in favour of paid FDV leave in modern awards, the FWC noted the acute financial circumstances that employees experiencing family and domestic violence face and concluded:
On the basis of this evidence, we are satisfied that the current [National Employment Standards] and award minimum safety net is not fair and relevant from the perspective of employees experiencing FDV, particularly those who are low-paid, because it does not address this necessity for income security.
Implementing paid FDV leave as a minimum employment standard
2.18
An increasing number of both large and small employers have implemented paid FDV leave policies in their workplaces. Numerous submitters described entitlements ranging from 10 to 20 days of paid leave together with a range of other supports for staff affected by family and domestic violence. The ACTU submitted that currently over six thousand employers, including all state and territory governments, provide an entitlement to paid FDV leave for 1.2 million employees through collective agreements.
2.19
The bill will extend this entitlement to all national system employees, including casual employees. Pending the ratification of International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention (No. 190), the entitlement would also be extended to non-national system employees.
2.20
While generally voicing support for the provision of 10 days paid FDV leave, some employers expressed concern that the provisions in the bill went further than the model proposed by the FWC.
Financial impact on business
2.21
Employer representatives expressed concern about the cost to business of implementing the paid FDV leave entitlement, particularly as some businesses were grappling with the impact of skills shortages, inflation and the COVID-19 pandemic.
2.22
The Australian Retailers Association (ARA) noted that employers may experience challenging cashflow implications as a result of the bill. The ARA stated that employers who keep a reserve of funds based on an assumption of how the leave will be used could constrain the cashflow and growth of a business, while employers who do not keep a reserve of funds could experience cashflow issues if an employee applies for paid FDV leave.
2.23
However, research undertaken by the Centre for Future Work at the Australia Institute (Centre for Future Work), has concluded:
the experience of employers which presently offer paid FDV leave provisions to their employees suggests that, on average, each employee utilising the paid leave entitlement utilises significantly less than the maximum benefit entitlement;
there will be no significant or even measurable impact arising from the extension of paid FDV leave to all workers on overall labour costs;
less than one-sixtieth of one per cent of total working time would be lost using this entitlement by victims of family and domestic violence; and
the sustainability and performance of the national economy will be incrementally strengthened by the extension of this benefit to all workers.
2.24
An independent evaluation undertaken by the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC) in 2021 estimated the total annual cost to employers of providing an entitlement of 10 days of paid FDV leave to modern award wage holders to be somewhere between $30 million and $34 million per year. Professor Alan Duncan clarified that this range reflects BCEC estimated costs under different assumptions regarding family and domestic violence incidents and the take-up of FDV leave. Professor Duncan stated:
In our view, costs of this magnitude won't have any significant effect on employment growth, and the financial costs to individual businesses are unlikely to be substantial…Our report estimates cost savings to employers of up to $14 million each year.
2.25
The Australian Industry Group (Ai Group) stated that focussing on aggregate costs in relation to the entitlement was not helpful to small employers, arguing that an employer-funded scheme needed to consider the impact to individual businesses.
2.26
The committee notes that the FWC considered that the upper range estimates in the expert reports prepared by Dr Jim Stanford and Professor Duncan were sufficient to conclude that paid FDV leave would not result in significant cost being imposed on employers or the economy.
2.27
In fact, analysis conducted by Dr Stanford concluded that the cost of a universal entitlement to paid FDV leave, regardless of the size of the employer would be approximately five cents per worker per day.
2.28
The experience of the Western Australian Government supports this. Mr Alex Lyon, appearing on behalf of the Western Australian Government, stated that while there was an initial impost in relation to the establishment of the entitlement, this had since become a notional cost:
In terms of the data, which gives you an indication of the resourcing required, in the six months to February 2022, 454.3 days were accessed across 160,000 public sector employees, which represents 0.03 per cent of the annual entitlement afforded to public sector employees. Therefore, we think the resourcing requirements are relatively small.
2.29
A number of submitters and witnesses proposed that the entitlement should be funded by government in a similar manner to Parental Leave. The Council of Small Business Organisations Australia (COSBOA) contended that as domestic violence is a ‘societal issue’, any financial aid provided to victims should be made available through a government-paid scheme via a centralised government agency.
2.30
However, the committee heard that such a scheme would be counterproductive. The committee heard that people experiencing family and domestic violence must already navigate a complex system in order to connect with services and leave violent situations. To introduce another layer of complexity would not be in the best interests of the employee. The ACTU explained:
…it is counterproductive. The kinds of things women need to access this leave for include taking the time to deal with government processes such as Centrelink. So it becomes a catch 22 where, to access the leave she needs to use to then navigate the complex systems, she has to navigate the complex systems. She is stuck, effectively, in a web of not having the time and space to properly equip herself to leave a violent situation.
2.31
The ARA suggested that the cost of providing the entitlement should be shared by government and business, with government providing a ‘safety net’ and business providing ‘top-up’ payments. The Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman (ASBFEO) also suggested a government subsidy for leave periods in excess of three days as a means of assisting small business to support employees accessing the entitlement.
Cost and impact of family and domestic violence in the workplace
2.32
As well as contributing to the economic and personal security of individuals affected by family and domestic violence, workplace responses to family and domestic violence have the potential to benefit the broader Australian economy.
2.33
Unions NSW submitted that employers already face additional costs as a result of family and domestic violence through increased absenteeism, lost productivity, diminished performance and employees leaving the workplace.
2.34
The committee received submissions from a number of employers, including small businesses, who currently have paid FDV leave policies in place. These submitters contend that the cost of providing the leave is significantly outweighed by the benefit of retaining employees, as it enables the organisation to avoid costs associated with staff turnover, recruitment and training.
2.35
Thales Australia instituted a policy providing 10 days paid FDV leave in 2019 and submitted that this ‘has been positive both for employees and the company and we have not found provision of such leave to be onerous’. In August 2022, Thales Australia moved to increase the quantum of this leave to 20 days per year.
2.36
The Albion Park Rail Community Centre reasoned that as a small business, their organisation would be less able to manage the costs associated with not providing paid FDV leave, including staff turnover, which could result in the business having to close its doors.
2.37
This view was echoed by Southern Youth and Family Services (SYFS), who stated that the provision of paid FDV leave was beneficial to their organisation as they could not afford to lose ‘skilled, committed and experienced’ employees.
2.38
SYFS considered that the overall cost of providing paid FDV leave in its workplace had been minimal, with some of the cost being offset by maintaining the employee and not having to engage in recruitment, training and onboarding. SYFS offers paid FDV leave to approximately 220 employees and submitted that of the five per cent of staff who had exercised the entitlement, not all had used the full 10 days. All of the staff who had accessed the leave had remained with SYFS with the exception of one employee who relocated to a different state.
Extending paid FDV leave to casual employees
2.39
The bill provides that casual employees will be paid for rostered shifts, including where a shift has been offered and accepted.
2.40
Some employer groups expressed reservations regarding the inclusion of casual employees as recipients of this leave entitlement, noting that casual employees already receive a loading in lieu of leave entitlements for other forms of leave.
2.41
COSBOA expressed concern that the extension of the entitlement to casual employees may add disproportionate costs to small businesses who often utilise casual workers. Noting that small business employers are time poor, COSBOA questioned the ability of employers to establish that an employee had been rostered on as often this is managed without a formal roster.
2.42
The ASBFEO submitted that small business could bear a disproportionate cost that went beyond the payment of the leave entitlement to include the time a manager or operator would spend to find a replacement for the employee, wages for the replacement and the potential costs of operating the business with a depleted workforce.
2.43
The Ai Group contended that the inclusion of casual employees would mean that employers who experience high turnover of labour, or industries that have larger cohorts of casual employees, will have ‘a much higher exposure to the entitlement’ and will experience a bigger impact as a result.
2.44
The ACTU observed that while a roster may not exist and casual engagements in the workplace tend to be on an ad hoc basis, arrangements for work are generally made in advance to ensure that work is completed. The ACTU noted that the proposed provisions are based on whether the offer of a shift is made by the employer and accepted by the employee, which is ‘a simple and direct way’ of establishing the shifts of a casual employee.
2.45
Legal Aid NSW submitted that despite many employers not complying with requirements to provide rosters, many casual workers often work according to a set pattern of hours and days. Legal Aid NSW suggested that proposed section 106BA of the bill could be amended to include access to the leave entitlement for casual employees who ‘had worked their usual weekly hours’.
2.46
In introducing the bill to parliament, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, the Hon Tony Burke MP, (minister) observed that casuals are not spared from family and domestic violence, noting that women who are experiencing family and domestic violence ‘have a more disrupted work history, and are more likely to be employed in casual work.’
2.47
The Law Council of Australia, while noting that the inclusion of casual workers in the bill was contrary to the current limited leave entitlements available to casuals, recognised that as women who have experienced family and domestic violence are more likely to be employed in casual work, and family and domestic violence disproportionately impacts women, the exclusion of casual employees would ultimately undermine the bill’s ability to ‘ameliorate financial difficulties for workers seeking to manage and exit family violence situations’.
2.48
In its submission, the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (the department) acknowledged that the inclusion of casual employees was a departure from some other National Employment Standard (NES) paid leave entitlements. However, the department noted that the FWC had noted there was intrinsic merit in extending financial support to casual employees experiencing domestic violence. The department observed:
The Full Bench expressly stated that they had no view on whether the NES should be varied to provide for paid family and domestic violence leave in the terms of its provisional view, recognising that setting of the NES is a matter for Parliament, not the [FWC].
Inclusion of non-national system employees, sole traders and employee-like working arrangements
2.49
Submitters expressed concern that the bill did not make provision for a range of workers outside the scope of the Fair Work Act who may be affected by family and domestic violence.
2.50
The National Farmers’ Federation (NFF) highlighted the position of farm businesses, sole traders, partnerships and owner operated businesses:
Our submission also discusses the nature of most of our farm businesses, soul traders and partnerships and owner operated where members of such partnerships do not always receive a regular wage or only one that may be dictated by their controlling and coercive partner. We note that this legislation will not in any way support people trapped in those businesses.
2.51
The department clarified that the Fair Work Act covers the relationship between employers and employees, and that sole traders who aren’t employed by the business would not be governed by the Fair Work Act. The department noted that other mechanisms, such as the Escaping Violence Payment administered by the Department of Social Services, could be accessed by any worker, including sole traders.
2.52
Submitters noted and supported the provisions in Schedule 2 of the bill to extend the paid FDV leave entitlement to non-national system employees. However, some submitters sought clarity on the implications for non-national system employees if the ILO Convention (No. 190) concerning Violence and Harassment is not ratified in time and Schedule 2 does not come into effect.
2.53
The department advised that a number of steps needed to be undertaken before Australia is able to lodge its instrument of ratification, but that this process was underway, with the minister having written to parties including the ILO and state and territory ministers to advise of Australia’s compliance with the obligations under the convention.
Importance of payment at actual rates of pay
2.54
A number of submitters expressed concern about the provision for paid FDV leave to be paid at the actual rate of pay. The NFF and COSBOA expressed concern that departing from the base rate of pay would introduce complexity in calculating what an employee would be owed, particularly in the case of casual employees.
2.55
Lucas Restaurants and the Aesthetic and Beauty Industry Council suggested that the requirement to pay FDV leave at above the base rate of pay may need closer examination in the case of small businesses. Both witnesses noted that in addition to meeting the costs of the entitlement, many small businesses in service industries would need to meet the cost of the lost client or the replacement staff member.
2.56
The department clarified that the bill provides for employees to be paid the same remuneration for a day of paid FDV leave as they would have received but for taking leave:
While payment at the base rate of pay is the minimum standard for some leave entitlements under the NES (with some exceptions such as for payment in lieu of notice of termination), a different approach is applied for the paid family and domestic violence leave so that taking leave does not result in the employee losing pay.
2.57
The importance of employees not losing pay as a result of taking leave was stressed by a number of submitters.
2.58
The CFMEU Construction and General Division supported this requirement of the bill, stating that domestic violence came ‘at a great cost’ and that affected individuals needed the assistance of all monetary resources available to them. The Newcastle Domestic Violence Committee also commented that no employees should be financially disadvantaged as a result of leaving a violent relationship.
2.59
Submitters and witnesses explained that a change in the amount of pay a victim receives could act as a red flag for perpetrators who may be monitoring the victim’s payslips and bank accounts.
2.60
Gateway Family Services advised that payment of the leave entitlement at an employee’s actual rate of pay is essential, as the time leading up to and immediately after an individual leaves a violent situation is a time of heightened risk for the individual, and changes to pay may have the effect of alerting a perpetrator that their victim is preparing to leave.
Administering the paid FDV leave entitlement
2.61
Evidence to the inquiry underscored the importance of providing support to employers to assist them to implement and administer the scheme.
2.62
Submitters identified aspects of the bill that they considered required clarification, including the evidentiary requirements employers could request to substantiate an employee’s entitlement to the leave; how to record the leave on an employee’s payslip; how the entitlement should be on-costed and deducted and whether perpetrators of family and domestic violence could apply for the entitlement. Submitters also sought clarity on the role of the FWC regarding the interaction between existing enterprise agreements and the entitlement under the NES.
2.63
Submitters noted that clarifying the provisions in the bill and providing guidance on the practical implementation of the entitlement would be ‘conducive to a simple implementation across workplaces.’
2.64
Submitters recommended that the bill should be amended to provide for a review 12 months after implementation. COSBOA submitted that such a review should include both qualitative and quantitative research.
2.65
The department confirmed that, together with the government’s commitment to broaden the supports available to employers, there is an intention to review the impact and operation of the bill at a later date. Ms Lace Wang advised that the department is exploring ways to collect evidence following implementation of the entitlement to support a review of the paid FDV leave entitlement and to quantify its impact on the economy, on employers and on employees.
Privacy and confidentiality
2.66
Addressing confidentiality and privacy is critical in implementing paid FDV leave, both to protect the employee and ensure that their workplace remains a safe and supportive environment, and as part of the process of normalising disclosures in the workplace.
2.67
Adequately managing the privacy and confidentiality of employees was a particular cause for concern for employers. A number of submitters and witnesses underscored the importance of providing resources tailored to the needs of employers, particularly small businesses, to assist them to navigate disclosure requirements as well as legally and practically discuss family and domestic violence issues with their employees while at the same time maintaining employee privacy.
2.68
The ARA noted the potential for victims’ privacy to be compromised in instances where victims work in the same environment as their perpetrators. Similarly, the NFF noted the potential for an employee’s privacy to be compromised in small communities where ‘everybody knows everybody’. The NFF suggested that in such circumstances it may be more appropriate to have an intermediary or advocate between the employer and the employee to avoid additional trauma to the victim.
2.69
The Australian Services Union (ASU) emphasised that disclosures are already being made in the workplace and that the introduction of paid FDV leave and the systems and supports that sit around it offers a way to deal with disclosures in the workplace in a supportive and safe way for everyone involved. Ms Natalie Lang told the committee:
I think it's a very worrying dialogue to move to, where we start saying: 'Domestic violence can go back into the home and be a personal matter that we don't talk about.' The fact is that we have brought the best form of disinfectant, which is sunlight, to the scourge of family violence and we are talking about it in all social settings. Now we have the opportunity to do so in a supportive, safe way for everyone who's involved in that conversation: the employee making the disclosure, but also the manager or the business owner who is receiving that disclosure who will now be best equipped to be an appropriate part of the referral pathway and receive that disclosure safely for themselves.
2.70
The question of how to display paid FDV leave on an employee’s payslip appears to be of particular concern to employer representatives who noted the potential for this to compromise an employee’s safety. The ASBFEO proposed that further guidance was needed to ensure that employers had clarity on their obligations in relation to payslips.
2.71
A number of submitters outlined for the committee how they had addressed issues of confidentiality and privacy in rolling out paid FDV leave. While many admitted that they initially had questions in relation to maintaining confidentiality, in practice they had found it to be manageable with appropriate systems in place. Ms Catherine Walsh, PwC Australia, explained:
That is one of the challenges, on one hand: how we record and keep it. But the more important issue is around privacy and confidentiality, and making people feel safe that this won't be known by many others or visible externally. That's been entirely manageable. I think that if anyone else says, 'Oh, it must be recorded,' a generalised leave code is fine—particularly given the numbers that we're seeing. It's not the same as annual leave, or long service leave, or carers leave or the like, where you have many more people accessing it. It's important and the privacy and confidentiality are important, and this doesn't need to be recorded in the same way.
2.72
Canva outlined the privacy and confidentiality measures it had implemented in launching a global policy to support employees experiencing family and domestic violence, which include:
a privacy and consent statement that the employee reads and actively consents to, noting that consent can be removed at any time;
ensuring workplace safety plans and file notes are never saved to an employee file and access to them is restricted;
the use of generic labels on payslips and employment records;
the ability to use alternative methods of payment if existing accounts are being monitored; and
limiting the ability to enter leave information in the system to select members of the People team so no mangers or team members are aware of the type of leave.
2.73
A number of submitters commented on the benefit of being able to draw on resources such as those provided by Safe Work Australia, the Australian Human Rights Commission and the ASU.
2.74
The National Women’s Safety Alliance (NWSA) noted that while confidentiality was a legitimate concern, Australian workers already have access to some form of FDV leave and as such, there are existing best practice guidelines and policy frameworks available to employers. However, the NWSA suggested that the government should work with stakeholders, including employers who have already implemented paid FDV leave, to develop best practice models and guides for employers.
Support for small businesses is essential
2.75
In his second reading speech, the minister emphasised that the government recognises that business, particularly small businesses, will need some time to adjust their systems to support the implementation of paid FDV leave:
The government recognises that small businesses face a number of unique challenges here. They often have lower cash flow and lack the full sophisticated human resources capacity to administer a new leave entitlement and manage the associated sensitive issues.
2.76
The minister stated that providing support for small business is essential, and that the government would work with small and large businesses to ensure they are equipped to administer the entitlement.
2.77
To assist business, the commencement of the entitlement is being phased. Businesses will have more than six months from the date of introduction, and small business more than 12 months. The government is also committed to consulting on a package of implementation support measures for small business to assist with rolling out this entitlement.
2.78
The department confirmed that consultation on the implementation of the bill has commenced and is following on from consultations with a range of stakeholders, employer peaks, and unions during development of the bill. The department advised that this consultation includes small business representatives.
Training and resources
2.79
Evidence to the inquiry emphasised the importance of training and equipping employers and employees to respond appropriately to disclosures of family and domestic violence by employees and co-workers and stressed the importance of developing national training standards and accreditation.
2.80
The ASBFEO stressed the significance of training for small business and noted that ‘strong and dependable guidance from the Fair Work Ombudsman’ would be critical to ensure that small business owners are able to understand and fulfil their obligations in relation to the entitlement to paid FDV leave.
2.81
The ASBFEO expressed concern regarding the ability of small business owners to provide suitable support to employees experiencing family and domestic violence in light of the unique nature and closeness of the relationship that often exists between small business owners and their employees. ASBFEO suggested the following supports to assist small business owners:
guidance and resources produced by family and domestic violence experts which would put small business owners in the best position to assist employees while also minimising risk of emotional injury to the employer; and
a hotline service that would assist small business owners to navigate the complexities of family and domestic violence in the workplace.
2.82
Submitters and witnesses noted the range of resources and supports already available through unions, the Australian Human Rights Commission and Safe Work Australia. At the same time, there was wide agreement that there is a real need for the government to provide an education and training campaign to support the implementation of paid FDV leave, designed and implemented with employer representatives, union representatives and specialist service providers.
2.83
Full Stop Australia told the committee that such training needs to be conducted by providers that have specific expertise in the area of family and domestic violence and must be tailored to the needs and requirements of individual organisations. The Women’s Legal Centre ACT noted that in its experience of providing training to employers, framing family and domestic violence as a human resources issue rather than a social issue had generally received better responses and assisted managers and employers to understand their obligations and expectations.
Committee view
2.84
The committee would like to thank stakeholders for their engagement in this inquiry, as well as the significant work that has been put into submissions to assist the committee in its consideration of the Fair Work Amendment (Paid Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Bill 2022 (bill).
2.85
The committee welcomes the amendments contained in the bill and believes that they will help tackle family and domestic violence in Australia by strengthening the support provided to employees experiencing family and domestic violence. The committee notes that the bill is the first legislative commitment in the Australian Government’s (government) Secure Australian Jobs Plan and a significant step towards realising the government’s women’s safety and economic security agenda.
2.86
The committee was particularly encouraged by the broad support for the bill from stakeholders, including from employer and employee representative groups. Indeed, the committee notes that most stakeholders recognised the urgency of addressing the prevalence of family and domestic violence in the community and the importance of having measures in place to support employees who are experiencing family and domestic violence.
2.87
Many stakeholders emphasised the positive impact that the measures contained in the bill would have on employees experiencing family and domestic violence, including enhancing their ability to access support services, take steps to leave violent situations, and maintain gainful employment and financial autonomy. Stakeholders also argued that the bill would help drive positive cultural change in Australian workplaces and send a clear message that family and domestic violence is not just a criminal justice issue but an economic and workplace issue.
2.88
The committee acknowledges the concerns raised by some stakeholders about the costs to business of implementing the changes. However, the committee is encouraged by evidence that the existing use of paid FDV leave schemes has been modest and the Fair Work Commission’s view that the upper range estimates provided by expert reports were sufficient to conclude that paid FDV leave would not result in significant costs to employers or the economy. In addition, the committee notes that the government will be conducting extensive consultation with affected businesses to ensure they are properly prepared to provide the new entitlement to employees.
2.89
That said, the committee is cognisant of concerns raised by some stakeholders, including employer groups, that certain groups of workers such as independent contractors may not be able to benefit from the new entitlement by virtue of their employment arrangements. The committee notes the government’s commitment to regulating ‘employee-like’ forms of work such as in the gig economy and believes that there is merit in examining how the new measures in the bill can be extended to those groups of workers in the near future.
2.90
The committee supports calls for a review of the bill to be conducted after its commencement. The committee is of the view that such a review should consider the extent to which the bill is meeting its aims and assess the adequacy of support and guidance available to business to assist with its implementation. The committee therefore recommends that the government commission an independent review of the provisions of the bill be undertaken 18 months after the commencement of Schedule 1, and that the review assess the adequacy of support and guidance available to business to assist with implementation of the bill.
2.91
Overall, the committee considers that the bill represents a substantial step forward in providing support for individuals affected by family and domestic violence and will have a significant impact on changing workplace culture in relation to understanding, education and management of family and domestic violence in the workplace. The committee therefore recommends that the bill be passed.
2.92
The committee recommends that the Australian Government commission an independent review of the provisions of the Fair Work Amendment (Paid Family and Domestic Violence Leave) Bill 2022 (bill) to be undertaken 18 months after the commencement of Schedule 1. The committee further recommends that the review assess the adequacy of support and guidance available to business to assist with implementation of the bill.
2.93
The committee recommends that the Senate pass the bill.