Additional comments - Labor Senators

Labor supports the intentions of the bill and will support it; however, Schedule 1 is a missed opportunity and highlights the government's failure in priorities.
Labor agrees that everyone should be paying their fair share of tax, however, this legislation does see that burden placed on the workers, rather than these multinational tech companies. It also shows that the government is happy to pursue these workers for more tax but does very little to ensure they have secure fair wages and safe conditions.
If the government is willing to take steps to regulate the gig economy when it comes to tax, they need to do the same for worker pay and conditions. It's not good enough to allow these workers to be relegated to substandard pay and conditions in an unsafe work environment.
During the hearing, we heard from the Transport Workers Union (TWU) who described the bill as a "kick in the guts":
I regret to say this bill, unfortunately, is like a kick in the guts to the thousands of workers in the food delivery, rideshare and parcel delivery sectors of the gig economy. It does nothing to rein in the exploitative and inhumane business practices of companies…
This bill does nothing to limit the ability of companies to evade tax responsibilities in our country. What it does do is set a tragic double standard…
We're here to implore this committee, and the government, to urgently and drastically broaden its focus. Yes, we need laws in this country to ensure everyone pays their fair share of tax; absolutely we do. But to do so while continuing to remain silent on the corporate tax avoidance and exploitation that is leading workers in this emerging sector to die is shameful.1
The committee heard from the Australian Services Union (ASU) who shared this view, saying the bill fell short on delivering wages and conditions:
We are supportive of the taxation law amendments being proposed to create greater regulation and transparency of the gig economy and platform apps in the human services sector. We just wish that there was similar regulation and transparency about minimum wages and conditions in these platforms.2
When asked if this bill would do anything to improve the pay and conditions, ASU Branch Secretary, Ms Natalie Lang, said:
No, I believe it absolutely falls short. It doesn't deliver anything in terms of wages and conditions, but it does show that platform providers keep the records necessary—and are capable of keeping the records necessary—to have a very clear picture of the earnings of workers who use their gig platforms, so they can equally use that data to ensure that workers are being paid minimum wages.3
Workers who use these platforms were asked their views on the bill and if they thought it was fair that it appears the government’s priority isn't legislating safe pay and conditions for gig and share economy workers. Ms Rosalina Pirozzi, who is a rideshare driver, described the lack of action as "heartbreaking".
I don't think it's fair, no. I think it's very unfair… Workers' rights are not being addressed at the moment. And it's heartbreaking, to be honest.4
Ms Pirozzil described her working conditions:
I've got no super, no sick pay and no workers comp, after working with Uber for six years. I can't afford to pay for my own super. I can't afford to even pay my GST. I have to take it from one of my other enterprises, from my online shop that I've started. I'm looking for other avenues. The low earnings are horrible.5
The committee also heard from food delivery rider, Mr Ashley Moreland, who talked about his experiences, highlighting the high-pressure environment caused by these platforms' monitoring of performance, which led to him being injured on the job:
I had assumed that any company operating in Australia would have certain minimum standards. I found quickly that there were times when I would be sitting in a park, literally earning zero dollars an hour when there was no business…
This facade of flexibility and low levels of control is a bit of a farce…
I actually found myself in an accident—I sustained an injury—only 2½ years ago I can honestly say that it was because of the extraordinarily high feelings of pressure that you're under to make these deliveries as quickly as possible, knowing that every single step of the way—from the time you accept the trip on the app to the time when you race into the restaurant, making do with traffic rules if you can—is monitored and noted against your profile and recorded. It then begs the question about why, if they can record all this data, they're not also being given the responsibility for reporting earnings for all the people who work on the platform.6
It's clear that more needs to be done to ensure these workers are protected, and as the TWU Secretary, Mr Michael Kaine, said:
This bill shows that the government is willing to regulate the gig economy. The gig economy needs to be regulated so that workers aren't exploited and that good employers, a core constituency of the coalition government, are protected as well.7
The committee also heard from Mr Jason Ward, from Centre for International Corporate Tax Accountability and Research, who suggested that while supportive of the concept of the legislation, they think it is misguided:
While CICTAR supports the concept of this legislation, there are concerns that the reporting requirements will be unfairly passed on to workers. In many cases, so-called 'gig workers' are already struggling to make a decent income. As is already the case in several jurisdictions, the Australian Government needs to take a closer look at regulating platform companies to ensure basic labour standards and increased transparency of multinational transactions.8
I think the focus of the bill is very much on the workers and not on the corporate structures. Obviously, I fully support making sure that information is collected on workers' income, but it seems to be a little bit of a misguided focus when you're talking about thousands of workers with very small incomes while there's clear evidence that Uber and most likely other multinational companies operating similar platforms are using offshore structures to avoid tax payments in Australia. This legislation is looking at the workers rather than at the corporate structures behind those operators.9
When asked to make what changes they would suggest for the legislation:
I think transparency on the companies that are providing the platform is essential. It must make sure that the burden of reporting is placed on the companies that operate the platforms, not on the workers providing those services; that is a fundamental first step. Then it should ensure fair tax payment from the operators of those platforms.10
Labor supports this legislation but it is clear that the Government needs to do more to ensure that these workers are provided with fair pay and conditions. If the Government is happy to regulate tax, they should be happy to regulate fair pay and conditions.
Senator Anthony Chisholm
Deputy Chair
Labor Senator for Queensland

  • 1
    Mr Michael Kaine, National Secretary, Transport Workers Union of Australia, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 5.
  • 2
    Ms Natalie Lang, Branch Secretary, Australian Services Union, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 4.
  • 3
    Ms Natalie Lang, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 8.
  • 4
    Ms Rosalina Pirozzi, Private capacity, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 7.
  • 5
    Ms Rosalina Pirozzi, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 6.
  • 6
    Mr Ashley Moreland, Private capacity, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 6.
  • 7
    Mr Michael Kaine, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, pp. 8–9.
  • 8
    Mr Jason Ward, Principal Analyst, Centre for International Corporate Tax Accountability and Research, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 21.
  • 9
    Mr Jason Ward, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 22.
  • 10
    Mr Jason Ward, Proof Committee Hansard, 6 October 2021, p. 23.

 |  Contents  |