House of Assembly Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1) 55 1 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Grievance Debate Aged-Care Sector Foreign Workers Aged-Care Sector Foreign Workers The Hon. D.G. PISONI House of Assembly Unley The Hon. D.G. PISONI (Unley) (15:53): Last week, we discovered what the Labor Party really stands for, and it was exposed in a Labor Party and union new deal to increase union membership and consolidate union power. This deal revolves around granting special access rights to foreign workers in the aged-care sector with specific provisions that favour the unions and their influence. A recent labour agreement for temporary skilled workers in aged care established by the Albanese government includes a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that stretches to seven pages, outlining various provisions for union access. Under this agreement, management is explicitly barred from worker inductions unless specifically invited by the union and required to make a positive statement about their relationship with the union. This effectively hands over significant control of private businesses to unions, and restricts the role of management to their workplaces. It is worth noting that unions have previously expressed opposition to increases in skilled migration, having voiced concerns about job security, wages and the potential for exploitation. These earlier statements from unions raise questions about their sudden change of position and their eagerness to embrace this new deal. Well, Mr Speaker, it is all about money. In sense, their motivation lies in increasing union membership, extracting money from the wages of new immigrant workers and expanding their union's influence in the Labor Party. More union members means more union fees, and more funds to donate to the Labor Party election campaigns. The Labor government and the unions defend this policy claiming it is a safeguard against exploitation to ensure quality aged care, but it is the ALP and the unions who are exploiting these workers. There are legitimate concerns raised by migration agents and aged-care workers. Many providers are reluctant to sign the MOU, labelling it as union overreach that hinders their ability to operate effectively. They fear that granting unions such access and control will impede their ability to make decisions in the best interests of their organisations and their clients. The federal opposition's immigration spokesman, Dan Tehan, aptly described the policy as the beginning of Labor's reshaping of the workforce and establishing a quid pro quo with the unions, in exchange for their support of Labor's vision of a 'big Australia'. Numerous industries currently relying on labour agreements for migration purposes are anxious about the precedent that this policy sets. They fear that their sectors may also become subject to increased union intrusion and control. Additionally, concerns have been raised about the potential for coercion of workers into joining unions as well as the erosion of freedom of association, and the freedom to not associate. Employers and employees want assurances that their workplaces will not be unionised by stealth, and that their rights to choose to not be in a union will be respected. The Australian Industry Group has expressed deep concerns about the agreement's implications, warning of potential unfettered union entry rights, and the influence unions might have over employment and business decisions. While the Labor Party and the unions want the public to believe their new deal is a noble one on the surface, the underlying motivations seem to be rooted in increasing union membership and funding to support the Labor Party's election campaigns. To be absolutely clear, the Labor/union deal's only focus is to expand union membership through migrant exploitation via in camera foreign worker inductions. Granting unions exclusive access rights raises serious questions about its true purpose. It is crucial that we engage in thoughtful and informed debate about labour shortages and skilled migration, but what is clear from this new deal is that Labor and the unions' only debate has been solely focused on what is in it for them and how they can take a clip off the wages of new migrants before they are even in a position to make an informed choice about joining that union or not. We must consider the potential consequences of further union influence in the workplace and the impact on businesses, job opportunities and the overall economy. Let us not allow hidden agendas to guide our policies, but instead strive for a fair and balanced approach that serves the best interests of all Australians.