Bill
Fair Work Amendment (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017
passed, as at 2017-08-16. Employment portfolio.
- Sponsor
- Not recorded
- Portfolio
- Employment
Recorded stages
- introduced — 2017-03-22
- second reading — 2017-03-22
- second reading — 2017-03-29
- second reading — 2017-03-30
- second reading — 2017-05-11
- second reading — 2017-05-23
- second reading — 2017-05-23
- third reading — 2017-05-23
- introduced — 2017-06-13
- second reading — 2017-06-13
- second reading — 2017-08-08
- second reading — 2017-08-08
- committee — 2017-08-08
- committee — 2017-08-09
- third reading — 2017-08-09
- other — 2017-08-10
- passed — 2017-08-10
- royal assent — 2017-08-16
Divisions
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-08-08.128.1) to the usual second reading motion, which means it was unsuccessful. ### Usual second reading motion text > *That the bill be read a second time.* To read a bill for a second time is to agree with its main idea. ### Amendment text > *Leave out all words after "that", insert:* > >> *"the bill be withdrawn and redrafted to provide for the establishment of a national Independent Commission Against Corruption."* — 2017-08-08, Senate: negative, ayes 7, noes 44
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-08-08.131.15) to read the bill for a second time. In other words, they voted to agree with the main idea of the bill and can now consider it in detail. ### What is the bill's main idea? According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd006): > *The purpose of the Fair Work Amendment (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017 (the Bill) is to amend the Fair Work Act 2009 (the FW Act) to:* > > * *create new criminal offences related to the solicitation, giving or receipt of corrupting benefits (applicable within the context of the industrial relations framework created by the FW Act) and* > > * *create new criminal offences related to national system employers offering, promising or providing certain ‘prohibited payments’ and other persons soliciting, receiving, obtaining or agreeing to obtain such payments.* > > *The FW Act also deals with negotiation and creation of enterprise agreements (EAs). An EA is an agreement made at the enterprise (business) level and is enforceable under the FW Act. An EA sets out terms and conditions of employment and the rights and obligations of the employees and the employer covered by the agreement. An EA must meet a number of requirements under the FW Act before it can be approved by the Fair Work Commission (FWC).* > > *The Bill would amend the FW Act to require bargaining representatives to disclose financial benefits that they, or a person or body reasonably connected with them, would or could reasonably be expected to derive because of a term of a proposed EA.* — 2017-08-08, Senate: affirmative, ayes 32, noes 28
- The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-08-09.49.3) introduced by NSW Senator [Doug Cameron](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/doug_cameron) (Labor), which means they won't be integrated into the bill. ### What did these amendments do? Senator Cameron [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-08-09.52.1): > *These amendments have the effect of changing the proposed offence of making and receiving cash and in-kind payments from a strict liability offence to one where the defendant has to act dishonestly. [...]* > > *As it currently is drafted, even though this offence has a maximum of two years imprisonment, there is no need for the giver or receiver of a benefit to intend that it is dishonest, corrupt or improper. [...]* > > *This means that a person can be found criminally liable under the proposed provisions for simply providing funds to a union if those funds do not fall within categories determined by the government as ones that they deem acceptable.* ### Amendment text > *(14) Schedule 1, item 3, page 7 (line 24), after "defendant", insert "dishonestly".* > > *(15) Schedule 1, item 3, page 10 (line 3), after "defendant", insert "dishonestly".* — 2017-08-09, Senate: negative, ayes 29, noes 33
- The majority voted against an [amendment](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-08-09.59.1) introduced by NSW Senator [Doug Cameron](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/doug_cameron) (Labor), which means it failed. ### What did this amendment do? Senator Cameron [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-08-09.59.1): > *This amendment changes the definition of 'related party' in relation to the new requirements to make disclosures during negotiations of enterprise agreements. The bill imposes disclosure requirements during the negotiation of enterprise agreements where a proposed term of an agreement will give either the union or the employer a financial benefit. The bill requires the union to disclose any potential benefits from an enterprise agreement that may flow to a related party, which, as currently defined, is an extended, unreasonable list of people and entities. The amendment defines 'related party' clearly and precisely as the branch or branches of the organisation which the members of the organisation—that is, the bargaining representatives—are members of, an officer of that branch, an entity controlled by the organisation, or a spouse of a divisional committee of management provided that an officer of the branch referred to in paragraph (a) is also a member of such committee. Again this is overreach. The amendment is needed to make this bill consistent with all the expert advice to the committee and the minister.* ### Amendment text > *(16) Schedule 2, item 1, page 11 (lines 8 and 9), omit the definition of related party in section 12, substitute:* > > *related party, of an organisation that is a bargaining representative for a proposed enterprise agreement, means:* > >> *(a) a branch of the organisation of which employees who will be covered by the agreement are members; or* >> >> *(b) an officer of a branch mentioned in paragraph (a); or* >> >> *(c) an entity controlled by the organisation; or* >> >> *(d — 2017-08-09, Senate: negative, ayes 27, noes 32
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2017-08-09.245.5) to agree with the bill as amended. This means that they can now vote on [whether to pass the bill](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/divisions/senate/2017-08-09/12). ### What does this bill do? According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd006): > *The purpose of the Fair Work Amendment (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017 (the Bill) is to amend the Fair Work Act 2009 (the FW Act) to:* > > * *create new criminal offences related to the solicitation, giving or receipt of corrupting benefits (applicable within the context of the industrial relations framework created by the FW Act) and* > > * *create new criminal offences related to national system employers offering, promising or providing certain ‘prohibited payments’ and other persons soliciting, receiving, obtaining or agreeing to obtain such payments.* > > *The FW Act also deals with negotiation and creation of enterprise agreements (EAs). An EA is an agreement made at the enterprise (business) level and is enforceable under the FW Act. An EA sets out terms and conditions of employment and the rights and obligations of the employees and the employer covered by the agreement. An EA must meet a number of requirements under the FW Act before it can be approved by the Fair Work Commission (FWC).* > > *The Bill would amend the FW Act to require bargaining representatives to disclose financial benefits that they, or a person or body reasonably connected with them, would or could reasonably be expected to derive because of a term of a proposed EA.* — 2017-08-09, Senate: affirmative, ayes 32, noes 27
- The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2017-08-09.248.1) to read the bill for a third time. In other words, they voted to pass the bill in the Senate. Since new amendments had been added to the bill, it will now return to the House of Representatives, where our MPs will decide on whether they agree with those amendments. ### What does this bill do? According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd1718a/18bd006): > *The purpose of the Fair Work Amendment (Corrupting Benefits) Bill 2017 (the Bill) is to amend the Fair Work Act 2009 (the FW Act) to:* > > * *create new criminal offences related to the solicitation, giving or receipt of corrupting benefits (applicable within the context of the industrial relations framework created by the FW Act) and* > > * *create new criminal offences related to national system employers offering, promising or providing certain ‘prohibited payments’ and other persons soliciting, receiving, obtaining or agreeing to obtain such payments.* > > *The FW Act also deals with negotiation and creation of enterprise agreements (EAs). An EA is an agreement made at the enterprise (business) level and is enforceable under the FW Act. An EA sets out terms and conditions of employment and the rights and obligations of the employees and the employer covered by the agreement. An EA must meet a number of requirements under the FW Act before it can be approved by the Fair Work Commission (FWC).* > > *The Bill would amend the FW Act to require bargaining representatives to disclose financial benefits that they, or a person or body reasonably connected with them, would or could reasonably be expected to derive because of a term of a proposed EA.* — 2017-08-09, Senate: affirmative, ayes 32, noes 27
Plain-language summary
Written by a model from the explanatory memorandum; not the record, as at 2017-03-22.
The bill creates new criminal offences for giving, receiving or soliciting corrupting benefits involving registered organisations or their officers.
It also requires bargaining representatives to disclose financial benefits they would derive from a proposed enterprise agreement, with civil penalties for non-compliance.
The penalties for corrupting benefits offences are substantial, and the disclosure requirement aims to improve transparency for employees voting on an enterprise agreement.
- Creates criminal offences for giving a corrupting benefit to a registered organisation or associated person.
- Creates criminal offences for receiving or soliciting a corrupting benefit.
- Creates criminal offences for national system employers (other than employee organisations) to provide prohibited cash or in-kind payments to employee organisations or their prohibited beneficiaries.
- Creates criminal offences for soliciting, receiving, obtaining, or agreeing to obtain such prohibited payments.
- Requires bargaining representatives to disclose financial benefits reasonably expected from a proposed enterprise agreement.
- Imposes substantial penalties for corrupting benefits offences.
Registered organisations, their officers, national system employers, employee organisations, and bargaining representatives.
Sources
em
em supp
billhome
frl act