Insecure employment affects women and men in different ways; it is not gender neutral. This submission responds to the Inquiry’s terms of reference through a gender lens.

The displacement of secure by insecure work is not due to a single factor such as growth in casual work. It is a constructive impermanency based on multiple strategies driving and enabling employers to maximise numerical flexibility, maintain a constant downward pressure on wages and side-step the responsibilities of the National Employment Standards. Historically, it has relied on leveraging women’s characteristic employment patterns, calling them ‘non-standard’ and treating them as atypical. They are typical for women. Nevertheless, the greater deviation from the male-dominated ‘standard employment relationship’ the less protection there is for workers (Vosko 2007; Vosko and MacDonald 2009).

It is critical not to allow the word ‘flexibility’ to be used to confuse employer-defined flexibility with flexibility for workers with family responsibilities. They are very different things.

The impact of insecure employment shows itself in the employment data, in COVID-linked risks, and in reduced income and housing security, and in each context women are most likely to suffer from ongoing structural defects in the current policy settings, and an unwillingness to rise to new ones.

Following our initial overview, we have focused on how these issues are worked out in the feminised and less well researched care sectors—aged, disability and child care.

Insecure employment affects women and men in different ways; it is not gender neutral. This submission responds to the Inquiry’s terms of reference through a gender lens.

The displacement of secure by insecure work is not due to a single factor such as growth in casual work. It is a constructive impermanency based on multiple strategies driving and enabling employers to maximise numerical flexibility, maintain a constant downward pressure on wages and side-step the responsibilities of the National Employment Standards.

Historically, it has relied on leveraging women’s characteristic employment patterns, calling them ‘non-standard’ and treating them as atypical. They are typical for women. Nevertheless, the greater deviation from the male-dominated ‘standard employment relationship’ the less protection there is for workers (Vosko 2007; Vosko and MacDonald 2009).

It is critical not to allow the word ‘flexibility’ to be used to confuse employer-defined flexibility with flexibility for workers with family responsibilities. They are very different things.

The impact of insecure employment shows itself in the employment data, in COVID-linked risks, and in reduced income and housing security, and in each context women are most likely to suffer from ongoing structural defects in the current policy settings, and an unwillingness to rise to new ones.

Following our initial overview, we have focused on how these issues are worked out in the feminised and less well researched care sectors—aged, disability and child care.

Principles of the new aged care system

Recommendation 1 - A new act

1.1. The Aged Care Act 1997  (Cth) should be replaced with a new Act to come into force by no later than 1 July 2023.  The objects of the new Act should  be to: See comments on Recommendations 41 and 42 at rows 311‐315.

1.1. (a) provide a system of aged care based on a universal right to high quality, safe and timely support and care to: i. assist older people to live an active, self‐determined and meaningful life, and ii. ensure older people receive high quality care in a safe and caring environment for dignified living in old age

1.1. (b) protect and advance the rights of older people receiving aged care to be free from mistreatment and neglect, and harm from poor quality or  unsafe care, and to continue to enjoy rights of social participation accessible to members of society generally

1.1. (c) enable people entitled to aged care to exercise choice and control in the planning and delivery of their care

1.1. (d) ensure equity of access to aged care

1.1. (e) provide advocacy and complaint mechanisms for people receiving aged care

1.1. (f) provide for regular and independent review of the aged care system

1.1. (g) promote innovation in aged care based on research

1.1. (h) promote positive community attitudes to enhance social and economic participation by people receiving aged care.

1.2. The new Act should state that the above objects are to be achieved by establishing:

1.2. (a) the Australian Aged Care Commission

1.2. (b) the Australian Aged Care Pricing Authority

1.2. (c) the office of the Inspector‐General of Aged Care and by the other provisions of the Act.

The bundle of behaviours called wage theft refers to employer non-compliance with minimum standards in base wages, loadings, overtime or superannuation. While widespread, wage theft is not gender neutral. The behaviour involved most commonly and most significantly affects low paid employees in part-time and casual work—all groups in which women predominate (Gilfillan, 2018; UnionsACT, 2018, p. 6); It is also commonplace in industries in which women predominate, including healthcare and social assistance ($220 million), accommodation and food services ($190 million) and retail ($180 million) (PwC, 2019). While it disproportionately affects migrant workers, among migrant workers it disproportionately affects women (Berg and Farbenblum, 2017, p. 32).

This submission complements our response to the Attorney-General’s previous discussion paper, which focussed on the penalty regime for wage theft.

Recommendations

In our response to the Attorney-General’s first, narrowly focussed discussion paper we made the point that neither that paper nor the options relating to remedies came to terms with the extent and implications of non-compliance with legal wage and entitlements requirements. In our view the same reasoning applies to the issues raised in this, the second discussion paper. The reach of wage theft is in itself an indicator that the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) is unable to make a significant impact on the problem, and selected amendments to the FWO’s compliance and enforcement regime extend its coverage. Indeed, no small government agency would have the reach or the resources to do so.

Leaving the matter to the FWO, even with more resources and sharpened legislative instruments, is the moral equivalent of walking away. The wage theft regime must be broadened.

Paid Parental Leave (PPL) affects women and men in different ways; it is not gender neutral. This submission responds to the terms of reference through a gender lens. NFAW is a strong supporter of PPL, and was part of the coalition that promoted the policy prior to the Productivity Commission Report1 (Productivity Commission, 2009) that led to the introduction of PPL. In that report the Productivity Commission identified the following commonly agreed objectives (at p XIV):

• generate child and maternal health and welfare benefits by increasing the time parents take away from work. The Commission estimates that the average absence will increase by ten weeks. Many more families would have an increased capacity to provide exclusive parental care for children for six to nine months

• promote some important, publicly supported social goals, and in particular, that having a child and taking time out for family reasons is viewed by the community as part of the usual course of work and life for parents in the paid workforce

• counter some of the incentives against working posed by the tax and welfare system - potentially contributing around six months of net additional employment for the average woman over her lifetime • increase retention rates for business, with reduced training and recruitment costs.

The retirement income system affects women and men in different ways; it is not gender neutral. This submission responds to the terms of reference through a gender lens.

This submission particularly addresses question 14 in the consultation paper:

What factors and information should the Panel consider when examining whether the retirement income system is delivering fair outcomes in retirement? What evidence is available to assess whether the current settings of the retirement income system support fair outcomes in retirement for individuals with different characteristics and/or in different circumstances (e.g. women, renters, etc.)?

Recommendations

1. NFAW recommends that withdrawals from superannuation should be taxed, albeit at a concessional rate to allow for the tax paid on contributions.
2. NFAW recommends that further detailed modelling should be undertaken to consider the combined effect of taxing superannuation withdrawals; the removal of the SAPTO and adjusting the pension means test to ensure that the effective tax rate on the age pension is comparable to marginal tax rates.
3. The legislated increase in superannuation guarantee should not proceed if it results in lower levels of take-home income for low income earners.
4. NFAW recommends that superannuation guarantee be payable on parental leave entitlements, and that a system of carer credits be introduced in respect of other full time carers.
5. NFAW recommends that the exemption from the superannuation guarantee for workers earning less than $450 per month be removed, with the change phased in to ensure that the take-home pay for such workers is not reduced.
6. Companies should be further incentivised to address the gender pay gap, career break and shared parental care policies within their workforce.
7. NFAW recommends that the rate of Commonwealth Rent Assistance be reviewed to ensure that it meets the needs of older renters; and that the value of home ownership taken into account when determining pension rates and aged care subsidies be reviewed to ensure that non-home owners are not disadvantaged.

The data shows that the unlawful underpayment of employees’ remuneration, commonly known as ‘wage theft’, has a significant impact on women.

The Government has recently issued a Discussion Paper canvassing penalties for wage theft. However, in our view neither the discussion paper nor the proposed remedies came to terms with the extent and implications of non-compliance with legal wage and entitlements requirements. For this reason, we welcome the opportunity offered by this Inquiry to extend the national conversation on wage theft beyond the limited proposals raised in the discussion paper.

The budget process affects women and men in different ways; it is not gender neutral. This submission responds to the terms of reference through a gender lens.

This inquiry has been initiated by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit pursuant to section 64T of the Parliamentary Service Act 1999, to review the operations of the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO). The terms of reference specify:

• PBO implementation of the recommendations of the PBO Review 2016/17 Report of the Independent Review Panel;
• PBO implementation of the recommendations from 2014 Joint Committee on Public Accounts and Audit Report No. 446 Review of the Operations of the Parliamentary Budget Office;
• Stakeholder relationships and engagement; and
• Possible areas of reform to support the effective operation of the PBO.

NFAW recommends

1. that the PBO be authorised to issue full details of policy costings where a parliamentarian states that the policy has been costed by the PBO regardless of whether the parliamentarian releases full details of that costing.
2. that the PBO be given a mandate to prepare an annual Women’s Budget Statement for Australia, and
3. that the Office for Women be tasked with partnering with the PBO on the internal analysis and building the capacity of the public service across the board to provide budget input.

Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law System

This submission is being made by The National Foundation for Australian Women (NFAW).

NFAW is dedicated to promoting and protecting the interests of Australian women, including intellectual, cultural, political, social, economic, legal, industrial and domestic spheres, and ensuring that the aims and ideals of the women’s movement and its collective wisdom are handed on to new generations of women. NFAW is a feminist organisation, independent of party politics and working in partnership with other women’s organisations.

The Family Law system affects women and men in different ways; it is not gender neutral. This submission responds to the terms of reference through a gender lens.

Recommendations:

1. The Government should be requested to respond to the recommendations of the ALRC and this response should be included in the deliberations of the Committee
2. The Parliamentary Committee should consider and refer to the recommendations of the ALRC Review of the Family Law System before making further recommendations.
3. All members participating in this Parliamentary Inquiry should be required to participate in family violence training to ensure that they understand the context within which Family Court matters are determined.
4. The ALRC recommendation to establish Family Courts in all state and territory jurisdictions should be considered.
5. Information sharing systems between all state and territory jurisdictions must be developed and implemented.
6. The proposal to merge the Family Court with the Federal Circuit Court should be abandoned
7. Funding for the Family Court is inadequate, and must be increased to ensure that the Court can deal with matters in a timely manner.
8. Legal assistance and other support services, including services available for interventions, need to be adequately funded to ensure that all parties, not just those with resources to fund legal assistance, have access to justice; including but not limited to: a. the National Partnership on Family Advocacy and Support Services. b. the Health Justice Partnerships. c. Legal Centres specialising in financial abuse establish a partnership with financial institutions to develop training materials to recognise and address financial abuse.
9. The recommendations of the ALRC in respect of a presumption of equal contributions in property matters be endorsed, subject to the Court being able to make adjustments where the outcome is manifestly unjust.
10. Division of superannuation be simplified by: a. Ensuring that the ATO is able to disclose details of superannuation holdings to the Family Court b. Reviewing the circumstances in which a superannuation “flagging” order is allowed c. Allowing the appointment of an independent trustee to a self-managed superannuation fund where required to ensure the preservation of assets.