Tony Abbott’s watering down of one of his signature policies, the Paid Parental Leave (PPL) Scheme, hardly comes as a surprise. The budgetary chaos is still raging and the scheme was at cross-purposes with its central message of restraint.
The policy had created divisions within the Liberal Party, and was opposed by Labor and many voters, who favoured a cheaper scheme and more investment in childcare. It seemed only a matter of time before the PPL scheme was modified (yet again).
The real question now is whether the Abbott Government will use this as an opportunity to give real consideration to initiatives that will most assist parents.
In the words of the Treasurer, the rationale for PPL is to “do everything we can to get more Australians into work and facilitate a more flexible work environment, particularly for women coming back into the workforce”.
Interestingly too, the modified policy has been badged as a “holistic families package,” suggesting that the Prime Minister has more in his sights than simply leave entitlements. Although details are currently thin on the ground, Abbott has said that the package will be better targeted and that any savings will be redirected into child care, undoubtedly a welcome change.
However, as yet there has been no mention about what should be crucial pillars in the holistic families package: flexibility in the workplace, and proper support for both women and men coming back into the workforce after taking parental leave. As it stands, the holistic families package does nothing to address these crucial issues.
Flexibility is a key entitlement protected by the Fair Work Act. Employees who have worked with the same employer for at least 12 months can request flexible working arrangements if they are the parent, or have responsibility for the care of, a child who is school aged or younger. Employers can only refuse such requests on reasonable business grounds. However there is no avenue for appeal against such a refusal, which is a serious gap in the law.
These provisions are fundamental to job security for parents, as they ensure that their jobs, income and conditions are protected, and that they won’t be discriminated against because of family responsibilities. However, whether these requirements are actually adhered to by employers is another story.
The “Pregnancy and Return to Work National Review” conducted by the Australian Human Rights Commission revealed that despite longstanding prohibitions, pregnancy and return to work discrimination is pervasive in Australia. The study found that one in two (49%) women reported experiencing discrimination in the workplace during their pregnancy, parental leave or on return to work.
The review, published in July 2014, found that employers were using the “reasonable business grounds” provision as a basis for refusing requests without a genuine attempt to accommodate employees’ requests.
These issues do not just affect women or the primary caregiver. The study found that more than a quarter (27%) of the fathers and partners surveyed reported experiencing discrimination related to parental leave and return to work despite only taking very short periods of leave.
Some of the clients we have seen have been refused requests to leave early to pick up school children, refused requests to work from home, and refused requests for part-time arrangements. The refusals have caused them distress, and made it difficult to continue in employment while taking care of their families.
Strengthening the right to flexible work arrangements, and in particular, giving these employees an avenue to appeal the refusal of a flexible work arrangement would go some way to address these problems. The Abbott Government should give serious consideration to these options as part of its review of PPL.