Division
The same number of senators voted for and against [amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1008](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-08-31.161.1), which were moved by NSW Senator [Mehreen Faruqi](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/mehreen_faruqi) (Greens). This means the amendments failed. ### Motion text > *(1) Clause 2 , page 2 (at the end of the table), [add](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr6583_amend_b35abd0b-a20a-41e4-9f3f-79ed652f89fd%22;rec=0):* > > *(2) Page 33 (after line 21) , at the end of the Bill, add:* > >> *Schedule 4—Fair Work Commission powers to deal with jobkeeper-related disputes* >> >> *Fair Work Act 2009* >> >> *1 Section 789GA (paragraph beginning "This Part provides that the FWC may deal")* >> >>> *Repeal the paragraph, substitute:* >>> >>> *This Part provides that the FWC may deal with a dispute about the operation of this Part, a dispute about whether a person who is a relevant employee of an entity should be treated as if they were an eligible employee of an entity and the entity entitled to a jobkeeper payment for the purposes of the jobkeeper payment rules, and other disputes arising between entities and employees in relation to eligibility and payments under those rules.* >> >> *2 Section 789GC* >> >>> *Insert:* >>> >>>> *eligible employee has the same meaning as in the jobkeeper payment rules.* >>>> >>>> *relevant employee has the same meaning as in the jobkeeper payment rules.* >> >> *3 After section 789GV* >> >>> *Insert:* >>> >>>> *789GVA FWC may deal with a dispute about eligible employees or related matters under the jobkeeper payment rules* >>>> >>>>> *(1) The FWC may deal with a dispute about:* >>>>> >>>>>> *(a) whether a person who is a relevant employee of an entity should be treated as if they were an eligible employee of the entity for the purposes of the jobkeeper payment rules; or* >>>>>> >>>>>>
Senate, 2020-08-31. negative: ayes 24, noes 24.
Question
The same number of senators voted for and against [amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 1008](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2020-08-31.161.1), which were moved by NSW Senator [Mehreen Faruqi](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/nsw/mehreen_faruqi) (Greens). This means the amendments failed. ### Motion text > *(1) Clause 2 , page 2 (at the end of the table), [add](https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:legislation/billhome/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Famend%2Fr6583_amend_b35abd0b-a20a-41e4-9f3f-79ed652f89fd%22;rec=0):* > > *(2) Page 33 (after line 21) , at the end of the Bill, add:* > >> *Schedule 4—Fair Work Commission powers to deal with jobkeeper-related disputes* >> >> *Fair Work Act 2009* >> >> *1 Section 789GA (paragraph beginning "This Part provides that the FWC may deal")* >> >>> *Repeal the paragraph, substitute:* >>> >>> *This Part provides that the FWC may deal with a dispute about the operation of this Part, a dispute about whether a person who is a relevant employee of an entity should be treated as if they were an eligible employee of an entity and the entity entitled to a jobkeeper payment for the purposes of the jobkeeper payment rules, and other disputes arising between entities and employees in relation to eligibility and payments under those rules.* >> >> *2 Section 789GC* >> >>> *Insert:* >>> >>>> *eligible employee has the same meaning as in the jobkeeper payment rules.* >>>> >>>> *relevant employee has the same meaning as in the jobkeeper payment rules.* >> >> *3 After section 789GV* >> >>> *Insert:* >>> >>>> *789GVA FWC may deal with a dispute about eligible employees or related matters under the jobkeeper payment rules* >>>> >>>>> *(1) The FWC may deal with a dispute about:* >>>>> >>>>>> *(a) whether a person who is a relevant employee of an entity should be treated as if they were an eligible employee of the entity for the purposes of the jobkeeper payment rules; or* >>>>>> >>>>>>
How each member voted
Per-member votes are not present in this static export. Consult the original division record.
Related bills
Only formal divisions leave a per-member record. A procedural vote is not necessarily a vote for or against a bill.