Brooke van Velden: Workplace Relations Minister on the new rules for gender-based pay equity claims

The Government says its new tough rules for pay equity claims will result in major taxpayer savings.  

The proposed law, which would lift the threshold of pay equity claims of gender-discrimination, is expected to have its third reading this morning.  

It's caused an uproar, with many women and union groups opposed to the idea.  

Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden told Mike Hosking she can't yet disclose the exact financial impact.  

However she says the Crown will save billions of dollars, if passed. 

LISTEN ABOVE 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, last time she was on the program, she promised
a suite of change to the workplace and yesterday was
your headline. Graver and overhaul of the pay equity system
are almost pasted, sort of pass partially passed last night
under urgency. The rest goes today. As far as I
understand it, current claims are off. Brook van Velden, Minister
of Workplace Relations, is with it's very good morning to you.

Speaker 2 (00:17):
Good morning mate. Lit a bit of heat.

Speaker 1 (00:19):
Yesterday on the grounds of Parliament. Is there more where
that came from? Do you suspect?

Speaker 2 (00:24):
Well, Look, I think there'll be some people who have
strong feelings, especially people who have been trying to negotiate claims.
But what I would say is I think it's better
for everybody that we've got the system right and everybody
still has the opportunity to bring a claim into the future.
It's just that the current government doesn't believe that we've

(00:44):
got those settings right that we can genuinely hand on.
Heart's say, the outcome of these claims is to rectify
genuine systemic sex based undervaluation. We believe with muddy the
waters with other collective bargaining things like inflation in other
labor market forces. And I think anybody who supports women
at work, which I do, should support us trying to

(01:06):
identify genuine systemic sex based undervaluation.

Speaker 1 (01:10):
And there's your problem. You can't, as much as I
support what you're trying to do, because what we're doing
currently is wrong. You can't because you will never compare
apples with apples. The comparators don't work.

Speaker 2 (01:23):
It is always going to be difficult. You're right, but
the government is committed to having a system for pay equity.
Where we have made some moves as a government is
how to tighten those thresholds so we can have greater
confidence that we were landing is on genuine sex based discrimination.
So I'll give you a couple of examples of how
we've tightened it to make the system have more confidence.

(01:44):
At the moment, people can choose a comparator for sex
based discrimination across the entire workforce. We're saying, let's start
firstly at home. If you can find people within your
own employer, that would be a good starting point. Comparison
can't be made with a similar employer. That comparison's not

(02:05):
there within your industry. If you can't find one there
you've got to stop. You can't fish for discrimination.

Speaker 1 (02:11):
Well, why don't you just hard, Why don't you just
be honest about it? You can't. I mean, this Christine
Bartlett thing started out. Everybody loves people who works and
work in wress simes. They're kind, they're loving, they're there
for the right reasons. They don't happen to get paid
a lot of money. Comparing them to mechanics was pointless.
It's stupid. Teachers are the same. Teachers are teachers. They're
not worth comparing to anything else in the world. You
either want to be a teacher or you don't. It

(02:33):
is what it is. And you're still trying to jurymander
with the system.

Speaker 2 (02:38):
Well, I think there's a bit of history that goes
back here. So we've had the equal pay system for
a while. I don't think anybody is disagreeing with this
that if you've got men and women doing the exact
same job, the same that's not what you're talking about though, No,
that's not. But there was a High Court case that
the National government in twenty seventeen which to then put

(02:58):
into law to have a process for pay equity. So
that's the basis here. This has been supported as a
pay equity system from National and labor. What I've done
as an act minister has come along and said, Okay,
I don't think we've got those settings right. How do
I feel confidence that we can tidy it up so
we have better confidence that where we are landing with
these settlements, were actually finding genuine cases of discrimination based

(03:23):
on set.

Speaker 1 (03:23):
Well, I wish you well with that. When we talk
about the savings, though, I don't want to get bogged
down on this. Do you know what the savings are
and they will come out in the budget or is
this guesswork?

Speaker 2 (03:35):
Look, all of the budget numbers are sensitive, and I ask,
but do you.

Speaker 1 (03:38):
Have a number? Is there an actual number?

Speaker 2 (03:41):
I have been provided a number, but I can't talk
about it. No.

Speaker 1 (03:45):
No, of course I don't want you to do. All
I'm asking is I don't know how you've got a
number for something that you're still inventing.

Speaker 2 (03:53):
Well, we have been provided a number. I'm sure only
after a few sleeps we'll be able to talk about it.
But all I can say at this point is it
is in the billions of figures and it will make
a significant cost reduction to the Crown.

Speaker 1 (04:08):
I'm sure it will, or I appreciate it very much.
Brooklyn building a workplace ministry. For more from the Mic
Asking Breakfast, listen live to news talks.

Speaker 2 (04:16):
It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio