Bills

Workplace Protection (Personal Violence) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

Mr FULBROOK (Playford) (16:00): It is a privilege to continue my remarks. As I was saying just before we stopped for lunch, I was offering my praise to the SDA and homing in particularly on the No One Deserves A Serve campaign. I was up in the Northern Territory when I first saw this in action. It has obviously been quite some time since I worked in retail but when you do have lingering memories of the abuse that you have copped over the years, it does rekindle memories of things that you have encountered in yesteryear. My response to this is that this is long overdue and I must extend my praise, beyond this legislation, to highlight this campaign and say what a wonderful thing this really is. Josh Peak and his staff, Jordan Mumford, really do deserve a lot of praise for this.

I do not want to criticise or be seen to be disagreeing with the remarks of my colleague the member for Light, but I did note that he was commenting about signage in small towns and small businesses whereby people were politely asked to respect their staff. My perspective on this is that this is a good thing and it is long overdue. I have heard utterings, during the course of this discussion, that this is a sign of the times: I don't accept that. This is a reflection of something that is long overdue. We could talk about the time when I worked in retail back in the 1990s and 2000s, and we could say that they were the good old days, and while we do hear a lot of the extremities in terms of the reports of violence, I would just like to remind this chamber that abuse, particularly verbal abuse, has been going on for quite some time.

It is absolutely fantastic that we have an organisation that has been championing the message of just showing respect to people who work in retail and they deserve nothing but praise for that. Having said that, I am being very careful here: I am talking a lot about the SDA but, as my colleagues so eloquently put it, there was a lot of consultation and a lot of involvement from some other very well-respected organisations. Yes, I am homing in on retail but this particular bill is relevant in all manner of workplaces and therefore the involvement of some very reputable organisations needs to be highlighted and to be praised. I do not really want to go into the details of everything but I do want to say that your involvement, from my perspective, is really respected and valued and I am glad we could get such a broad consensus in getting this bill together, with so much valuable input.

Something else that I want to highlight about this is the mindset of young people. Yes, this will be relevant to people in all age brackets but I do want to highlight the fact that when I entered retail, I was 14 years old, I was shy, I was timid and I had this underlying desire to simply want to do my best for the people who were giving me a job. When you are verbally attacked, you do accept a sense of consequence in that you are made to feel guilty for something that perhaps you are not actually guilty of. Using this platform and the platforms that we have seen with No One Deserves A Serve, I think it is an underlying change that is really needed. With people so young, they are vulnerable. Unfortunately, there is a power imbalance and therefore I think it is ideal that we have signage around the place to show the 1 per cent of the population that abuse of any form towards workers is simply not okay.

I have noticed also that to tie this in and to draw in on the consultation, a lot of work was drawn from previous experiences from the Australian Capital Territory that has seen a lowering of crime. I note that there was some expression of doubt from the member for Heysen as to whether this would be an effective measure, but our experiences from interstate have shown that this measure will work and I am very much looking forward to the outcomes.

With all this in mind, I really want my name on the Hansard to say, 'Yes, the member for Playford is very much in support of this bill.' I support anything that will make life more pleasant and more dignified for retail workers and, indeed, workers from a broad scale of professions. With that in mind, I commend the bill to the house.

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD (Reynell—Minister for Child Protection, Minister for Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence, Minister for Women) (16:05): This Workplace Protection (Personal Violence) Bill is really important. I am very grateful to the Attorney and his team for their development of this bill. I am also really grateful for the advocacy of the SDA, its members, their secretary, Josh Peak, and their delegates. I am grateful to them for their advocacy around this bill and also for the advocacy undertaken by a number of other unions in this space, which I will come back to.

Like many of us, when we debate bills like this, I think about some of my early jobs, and I will come to my early job in retail. My first job was when I was about 12 or 13. At Morphettville Racecourse there used to be an absolutely enormous bingo game conducted there. There were hundreds of tables and my job was to stand with the bingo caller and when somebody called out 'Bingo', I had to literally run to their table and check their card to see if they actually had bingo and were going to win. It was a fun job but it was also hard sometimes to break some very excited people's hearts when I went through their card and they actually did not have bingo at all.

My second job was when I was about 14. I cleaned a local butcher shop on Marion Road at North Plympton and that was really hard work. I then started working at Coles Plympton. I had a short stint on the checkout and then I started working in the deli. I loved working in the delicatessen. I loved the fact that about half my Plympton High School friends worked out the back restocking, worked on the checkout, worked on the floor, worked in the deli, worked in fruit and veg or the meat section. It was excellent. I absolutely loved being there. I loved serving customers and I loved having a chat.

There were lots of local people, as you can imagine, I knew from around our community and in some cases I knew exactly what they would order before they came to the deli. For some people it was 125 grams of savoury loaf, whatever that was. For others, it was half a kilo of chicken thighs and there were a lot of people at that time who liked to order really large pieces of bung fritz. It was an interesting time in the delicatessen, but I loved chatting with customers.

One of the other jobs that my friends (a couple of them also from Plympton High) and I had in the deli was cooking the chickens in the rotisserie. Early on a Saturday morning and then on a Thursday night we would put the stuffing in the chickens and then load the steel rods with chickens. Then we would take them off the rods and carefully put them on the trays to cool a little and then load them into the alfoil bags. We took a lot of pride in cooking 50 chickens at once. It was quite remarkable. We would then put on the next round to go around and cook.

The Hon. J.K. Szakacs: Did you get to mark it down for friends?

The Hon. K.A. HILDYARD: I loved it when I had the pricer and I could mark things down and felt really quite powerful—$2, $3—and also when I got on the microphone and let people know what the special of the day was. That was excellent. They were good times. I loved being there.

But there was something that happened each time I had the job of taking the chickens that had been loaded up from the rotisserie on a trolley to the front of the store at Coles Plympton, where there was a metal case where we put all the chickens in their bags for people to come and buy. Every time on a Thursday night when I went and loaded up the chickens, there was a really creepy man who would stand near the chicken warmer, and every time I or a particular friend of mine would put the chickens onto that warmer he would stand really close behind us and talk. He was so creepy. I felt really disturbed.

We had this happy time, and then as soon as we had to go and do that part of the job we felt slightly sick. We hated that moment when we had to go and do that part of the job and this particular man would just stand there. We were SDA members—of course we were, rightly—but we did not really know what to do and we did not know how to vocalise how this particular person made us feel. When I was getting ready to speak about this bill I remembered that time and that feeling, and how that impacted how we felt when we went to work and undertook that particular task at work.

Like many people here, we have gone through those experiences—not that experience, thankfully—and we have seen our young people, our children, traverse that journey of getting their first job. One of our sons did basketball refereeing and then worked for a long time at Boost at Marion. The other one worked in Macca's and then EB Games. All their friends have had those jobs as well, and I know that lots of people in Reynell's children and young people also have those jobs.

The reason that this bill is so important for all those young people, as we take it forward in this house and help it to progress to become law and provide those really important protections for mostly—not always, but mostly—young people undertaking those jobs in those particular industries, is that we can do something that means when those young people have that experience and feel that particular way, whether it is fear, apprehension or having to deal with particular sorts of violence, we now have a course of action through this legislation that can be taken to much better protect those young people.

We also now have a course of action for protection for other workers as well as those young people: not only for people who, at large, work in retail and who are obviously of a diversity of ages but also for workers who are ably and beautifully represented by the United Workers Union who work in hospitality, as well as those who are represented by the Australian Services Union who work in places like credit unions in shopping centres where there are public-facing positions in those particular environments.

Now, through the passage of this bill, we know we have laws so that when something is not right for a worker, we can act. We know that every worker absolutely deserves dignity, safety and respect at work, and when that is not there, when they are scared or when they are facing violence in all its forms, there is absolutely something that we can do, and rightly so. I am really pleased for all the workers for whom this now provides that remedy for those situations, and it provides them with protection that we now have something that they can do that they can rely on.

I again wholeheartedly thank the Attorney-General and his team for their work toward this bill. I thank those unions that I mentioned, particularly the SDA who have championed this particular legislation and those other unions and industries who have also backed this really important step forward.

Everybody who goes to work deserves to feel and to be safe and when they are not, when members of the public display those aggressive, violent, intimidating behaviours, we can make sure that they are dealt with so that safe, positive environments can continue. I commend this bill to the house.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (16:15): I am honoured to rise to support this important piece of legislation, the Workplace Protection (Personal Violence) Bill. It is an incredibly important bill.

I know that in the communities that I represent this will be warmly welcomed. I have my office in the major shopping centre in Whyalla, the Westland Shopping Centre. Unfortunately I have had several occasions to go and meet with retail workers who have been assaulted at the Westland Shopping Centre.

Just the other week, following the parliamentary sitting week when I returned to Whyalla, I went to one of our smaller shopping centres. When I arrived, three people had gone into one of the liquor takeaway stores in Whyalla at one of the smaller shopping centres. Those three people decided to help themselves to the alcohol and grabbed a whole heap of bottles. They were confronted by one of the workers—'confronted' is too strong a word; they were told, 'You cannot do that, you need to put it back.' The response from these three people was to threaten to smash a bottle across the head of one of the workers. Understandably they let those three people leave the premises with the shoplifted alcohol. There have been ongoing issues when it comes to threats, harassment and assaults of retail workers in the central business district in Port Augusta—and indeed at other locations in Port Augusta.

This bill, as I said, will be a very welcome initiative. It is a real improvement on what existed previously, both with more serious penalties and longer banning times and it is probably worth repeating—I know a number of people have mentioned some of the detail. Who can a workplace protection order be made against? The Magistrates Court or Youth Court may, on application, make a WPO in relation to a particular workplace if satisfied that the defendant has engaged in personal violence in relation to a workplace and may engage in personal violence in relation to a workplace during the time the order is proposed to operate if it is not made.

Personal violence includes any of the following behaviours in relation to another person at a workplace: physical violence or abuse; sexual violence or abuse; threatening behaviour; stalking; harassing, intimidating or offensive behaviour; and damage to a property that causes reasonable fear to a person at the workplace. A person of any age can be subject to a WPO. Unfortunately, it is not just adults who have been engaging in behaviour of this nature in some of the shopping precincts in my electorate, it is also young people as well. They just feel as though they can get away with it, and this might well change that dynamic. It is important.

Often, in responses like this, it can fall upon a person to take individual action, and the good thing about this bill is that a number of different people and organisations can apply:

(a) an employer at the workplace;

(b) the owner or occupier of the premises in which the workplace is situated;

(c) a representative of an employer association of which an employer at the workplace is a member;

(d) a health and safety representative for the workplace;

(e) a union entitled to represent the industrial interests of workers at the workplace.

This goes broader than retail workers, but retail workers are often the ones at the shopfront, if you like. I would like to also acknowledge the role of the SDA when it came to pushing for a strengthening of the provisions around the protection of retail workers. They have been running longstanding campaigns on a number of issues in order to ensure additional protection. Indeed, I think they have had a petition going around.

When it comes some of the bigger shopping centres we do have security officers, but, in comparison to some of the other states, the powers that those security officers have is often not sufficient. When I say it is not sufficient, if there is going to be any increase in the powers of security officers the necessary training will of course have to go with that. You are always better off if you de-escalate, if you can, but there are times when that is challenging. It is a source of frustration, both for security officers and indeed for people who work in shops, that the security officers often appear to be impotent to do what is necessary.

Which workplaces can a WPO apply to? It can be any workplace where the work requires direct interaction with members of the public, irrespective of whether the interaction is in person or not, and it includes any places where the worker goes or is likely to be while undertaking such work. That is fairly broad and it should be, in order to protect workers.

When it comes to the breach of any condition of the WPO, the penalty is a maximum of two years' imprisonment if the breach of the WPO does not involve personal violence, and up to five years' imprisonment if the breach of the WPO involves personal violence. When it comes to the banning order, it can be up to 12 months, but in particular circumstances it can go beyond 12 months. These are important changes. These are increases in penalties, and hopefully this is going to have a constraining impact.

The ACT has been mentioned as one jurisdiction where there have been changes in workplace protection orders, and the information that has been received is that they have had a significant impact in the ACT. When word gets out about what the consequences are of totally inappropriate behaviour towards workers, I hope that is going to have a real dampening impact.

I have flagged that there have been ongoing issues in Port Augusta. Those issues need to be addressed. This is just one strand, and there are clearly other things that need to be done. Indeed, last summer the CBD in Port Augusta was declared a public precinct, and I am on record as personally supporting the implementation again this year, or at least something equivalent, but preferably the implementation of what occurred last year. The feedback that I was getting was that it had a positive impact and I think it should be done again.

These things are not lightly entered into. It requires the police on the ground using their data to come to the belief that an order of this nature is needed. It is then considered by the police commissioner and, because of the enhanced police powers involved, it also requires the Attorney-General to give his or her assent in this case. As the member representing that area, I think we should move in that direction again this year.

I respect the police. Some people have raised this in relation to Whyalla, around Westland, but I will go on what the police believe is needed. It is not what someone on Facebook might say, or indeed what I might say. I do trust the police to be sensible about all of this stuff and I think the evidence is that they have been.

As I said, this is just one strand. There is a whole range of other initiatives that the government have undertaken, both in changes to laws around gangs and using a framework for outlaw biker gangs and adapting that to other gangs, which can sometimes be an issue in some of my communities, recognising it is a bit more complex and a bit more fluid when we are talking about organised outlaw biker gangs.

I want to flag that I have absolutely nothing against bikers, except the ones who engage in violence, drugs and all the rest of it. There are a lot of bikers in my communities and I think just about every male over the age of 50 seemed to be buying a Harley over the last few years. I was going to do the same thing, but my daughter gave me the stats on all the blokes who are getting Harleys and other powerful bikes and I thought I would give it a miss.

Of course, changes to bail laws are also going to have an impact, especially on those serious youth offenders. We just had yet another instance in Whyalla of stolen cars. I think the young offenders might have been from Port Augusta. The deep concern, given the age of some of these kids, is that they are either going to kill themselves or they are going to kill somebody else. This is not minor stuff. This is serious stuff.

I am full on in doing all we can when it comes to prevention. We need to be doing all we can when it comes to early intervention. The police know that often we cannot arrest ourselves out of the situation, but we still need that approach at the pointy end to keep the community safe. We also need a consistent approach over the years when it comes to early intervention in order to see if we can steer young people away from what will end up being not a good life for them because all of the evidence is that, when young people get involved with the juvenile justice system at an early age, the trajectory is usually not good, so prevention is incredibly important.

This is another bit of our legislation that is tackling the pointy end. When you speak to workers who have been assaulted you hear the trauma that it generates, the fear that it generates and that is why I think they will welcome this legislation.

The impact of this legislation is not just on workers in shopping precincts or workers who are facing the public in other circumstances. The other thing is that, by targeting those people who are causing the problems, it has a broader impact in that the population in general who use shopping centres will also feel safer. I think that is important as well.

We are protecting workers and, in protecting workers, we are creating a more positive atmosphere in our shopping precincts, wherever they are in the state. As I said, we have had particular problems in Port Augusta and we have had particular problems in Whyalla, in my electorate, so it is good to see some initiatives designed to improve that situation. The sooner we get this bill through the parliament and the sooner it is enacted the better, so I commend the bill to the house.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS (Cheltenham—Minister for Trade and Investment, Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Veterans' Affairs) (16:30): I particularly want to thank members for their contributions. In saying that, I note the stated support of this important bill by the opposition, as noted by the lead speaker. I commend his contribution, as well as those contributions of my colleagues on this side of the house.

In doing so, it is evident that there have been two particular themes of support provided here. The first is the unshakable commitment of those on this side of the house to worker safety, and that would be no surprise to anyone seeing that the Labor Party is by and for working people, formed by trade unions over a century ago. That is something that brings many of us, including myself, to public life and public office.

The second part is the unique experiences that working in retail brings to all of us who serve in public life, not just on this side but across both sides of politics. That is something that I have reflected on often in the past. The best advice that I can provide young people, or even not-so-young people, who want to become more engaged in politics, if they seek to forge a career in public office or even want to work for one of us in support of our roles in public life, is to work in retail or do some work in hospitality. That means that you are getting to meet people and you are getting to interact with people.

In both of those roles, as demonstrated by the contributions of members on this side of the house but also through this bill's intent, you are often dealing with people who are disrespectful, who are violent or who are putting their own sense of place or purpose in a moment well and truly beyond and above any sense of dignity or workplace safety.

As members have reflected on, it should not be part and parcel of working in retail or working in any job that you should be putting yourself forth to cop this sort of flak and cop this horrible behaviour, be it from childish all the way through to criminal, but here we are. In reflecting on and hearing members' contributions, it is very clear that people bring a particular personal passion to this very important piece of law that the government seeks the support of the house on.

I feel like I cannot miss out on the opportunity to reflect on my own time working in retail. I did a lot of work through high school and into university, and I really enjoyed it. It was something that I thoroughly enjoyed, from selling mobile phones and phone plans, to pulling beers and pinch hitting for various rugby and footy clubs on their club nights behind the bar. I worked in retail at Flinders University when I was up there, all of which were great and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

I have to say that probably the abnormal experience, or massively off-trend experience, I had is that I cannot recall a moment where I was subjected to the types of behaviour we are genuinely seeking to protect against. I say that not because of a flippant reflection but as a genuine sense of how lucky I was. It may, at times, have had something to do with me being six foot three and a bit wider than most people I was serving; notwithstanding that, I was incredibly lucky and incredibly fortunate not to have copped that sort of abuse.

We are committed, through this piece of law and through other pieces, other bills, before this place, that any moment we are fortunate to be on the Treasury benches we will continue to ensure that law is fit for purpose and responsive, and to ensure there is no equivocation when it comes to workplace safety, no room for any worker to feel that the government or the law is not on their side, and never, ever do anything other than send a very clear message to the public, the community, that we are a government that stands on the side of working people and their sense of safety, with a genuine commitment to safety at work. In saying that, I commend the bill to the house.

Bill read a second time

Third Reading

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS (Cheltenham—Minister for Trade and Investment, Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science, Minister for Local Government, Minister for Veterans' Affairs) (16:36): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.