Casuals’ loss of access to award and NES entitlements whilst significant and broad ranging cannot be “equalised” or reduced solely to a monetary value. The current debate regarding the cashing out of annual leave makes manifest that the issue is not restricted to the nominal monetary value attached to the leave, but also encompasses the “time value” inherent in the entitlement to be absent from work with pay. Put simply, no one would expect a permanent worker to work 1, 2, 3, 7 years etc. without an entitlement to take leave. This however is the reality for long term casual employees. The model clause68 proposed by the FWC to assist employees’ access the time to take annual leave will be of no benefit to casual employees. The AWRS study found that 31.3% of casuals in the manufacturing industry compared to 7.4% of non- casuals could not choose when to take holidays (refer Attachment 5). The data (refer Chapter 4) is that similar proportions of casual and permanent workers have between years service with the same employer. This suggests that many casuals are in fact permanent but denied access to the same entitlements as permanent workers. Mr David Kubli’s statement provides evidence that he is not allowed to access any paid annual leave or sick leave. However, when he does wish to take extended unpaid leave, he is required to apply for the leave three weeks in advance at a minimum. Mr Kubli takes forced unpaid leave during the Christmas shut down. When he did take a week of unpaid leave outside of the shut down it was to get married. Such circumstances, where a casual employee is dismissed after a period of taking unpaid leave are also reflected through unfair dismissal matters before the Fair Work Commission.69 (refer Chapter 5) Concepts such as Industrial Democracy, security, dignity at work, safety at work, gender equality, equal pay, training and skills development, engagement at work
Casuals’ loss of access to award and NES entitlements whilst significant and broad ranging cannot be “equalised” or reduced solely to a monetary value. The current debate regarding the cashing out of annual leave makes manifest that the issue is not restricted to the nominal monetary value attached to the leave, but also encompasses the “time value” inherent in the entitlement to be absent from work with pay. Put simply, no one would expect a permanent worker to work 1, 2, 3, 7 years etc. without an entitlement to take leave. This however is the reality for long term casual employees. The model clause68 proposed by the FWC to assist employees’ access the time to take annual leave will be of no benefit to casual employees. The AWRS study found that 31.3% of casuals in the manufacturing industry compared to 7.4% of non- casuals could not choose when to take holidays (refer Attachment 5). The data (refer Chapter 4) is that similar proportions of casual and permanent workers have between years service with the same employer. This suggests that many casuals are in fact permanent but denied access to the same entitlements as permanent workers. Mr David Kubli’s statement provides evidence that he is not allowed to access any paid annual leave or sick leave. However, when he does wish to take extended unpaid leave, he is required to apply for the leave three weeks in advance at a minimum. Mr Kubli takes forced unpaid leave during the Christmas shut down. When he did take a week of unpaid leave outside of the shut down it was to get married. Such circumstances, where a casual employee is dismissed after a period of taking unpaid leave are also reflected through unfair dismissal matters before the Fair Work Commission.69 (refer Chapter 5) Concepts such as Industrial Democracy, security, dignity at work, safety at work, gender equality, equal pay, training and skills development, engagement at work
Submission-AMWU-Attachment-1.docx