❓ Minister Kobelke refutes allegations made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition regarding the investigation of the Beachside Cafe in Albany, asserting the claims are unsubstantiated and potentially damaging to small businesses.
AnsweredQoN 238Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Given the allegations made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition regarding the actions of public servants investigating the Beachside Cafe in Albany, what steps has the minister taken to ascertain the truth of the matter? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Albany for his question. He has taken a keen interest in a range of cafes and restaurants in Albany and in some of the problems confronting them. He also personally knows Mr and Mrs Woodhams, the proprietors of the Beachside Cafe. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made a range of ludicrous and extreme accusations that, on investigation, have proven to be without foundation. He alleged that a senior investigating officer had shown no identification on entering this cafe. My office rang and spoke to Mrs Woodhams who said that when the officer entered the place, he introduced himself and handed over his business card. Strike one; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was absolutely wrong. In Hansard on 25 September 2002 he also alleged that the person directing this officer - happens to be a former trade union representative. None of the senior officers in this area had ever worked for a trade union. Strike two; again the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had his facts totally wrong. He then made accusations that intimidatory tactics were used and threats were made against the Woodhams. Again, they said that was not the case and that they had no complaint that could be taken up. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made a range of wild and totally unsubstantiated allegations. However, there is an important issue here; that is, the scare campaign and the misinformation being put out has the potential to do much damage to small businesses. Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for Albany for his question. He has taken a keen interest in a range of cafes and restaurants in Albany and in some of the problems confronting them. He also personally knows Mr and Mrs Woodhams, the proprietors of the Beachside Cafe. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made a range of ludicrous and extreme accusations that, on investigation, have proven to be without foundation. He alleged that a senior investigating officer had shown no identification on entering this cafe. My office rang and spoke to Mrs Woodhams who said that when the officer entered the place, he introduced himself and handed over his business card. Strike one; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was absolutely wrong. In Hansard on 25 September 2002 he also alleged that the person directing this officer - happens to be a former trade union representative. None of the senior officers in this area had ever worked for a trade union. Strike two; again the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had his facts totally wrong. He then made accusations that intimidatory tactics were used and threats were made against the Woodhams. Again, they said that was not the case and that they had no complaint that could be taken up. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made a range of wild and totally unsubstantiated allegations. However, there is an important issue here; that is, the scare campaign and the misinformation being put out has the potential to do much damage to small businesses. Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
I thank the member for Albany for his question. He has taken a keen interest in a range of cafes and restaurants in Albany and in some of the problems confronting them. He also personally knows Mr and Mrs Woodhams, the proprietors of the Beachside Cafe. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made a range of ludicrous and extreme accusations that, on investigation, have proven to be without foundation. He alleged that a senior investigating officer had shown no identification on entering this cafe. My office rang and spoke to Mrs Woodhams who said that when the officer entered the place, he introduced himself and handed over his business card. Strike one; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was absolutely wrong. In Hansard on 25 September 2002 he also alleged that the person directing this officer - happens to be a former trade union representative. None of the senior officers in this area had ever worked for a trade union. Strike two; again the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had his facts totally wrong. He then made accusations that intimidatory tactics were used and threats were made against the Woodhams. Again, they said that was not the case and that they had no complaint that could be taken up. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made a range of wild and totally unsubstantiated allegations. However, there is an important issue here; that is, the scare campaign and the misinformation being put out has the potential to do much damage to small businesses. Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made a range of ludicrous and extreme accusations that, on investigation, have proven to be without foundation. He alleged that a senior investigating officer had shown no identification on entering this cafe. My office rang and spoke to Mrs Woodhams who said that when the officer entered the place, he introduced himself and handed over his business card. Strike one; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was absolutely wrong. In Hansard on 25 September 2002 he also alleged that the person directing this officer - happens to be a former trade union representative. None of the senior officers in this area had ever worked for a trade union. Strike two; again the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had his facts totally wrong. He then made accusations that intimidatory tactics were used and threats were made against the Woodhams. Again, they said that was not the case and that they had no complaint that could be taken up. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made a range of wild and totally unsubstantiated allegations. However, there is an important issue here; that is, the scare campaign and the misinformation being put out has the potential to do much damage to small businesses. Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member for Albany for his question. He has taken a keen interest in a range of cafes and restaurants in Albany and in some of the problems confronting them. He also personally knows Mr and Mrs Woodhams, the proprietors of the Beachside Cafe. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made a range of ludicrous and extreme accusations that, on investigation, have proven to be without foundation. He alleged that a senior investigating officer had shown no identification on entering this cafe. My office rang and spoke to Mrs Woodhams who said that when the officer entered the place, he introduced himself and handed over his business card. Strike one; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was absolutely wrong. In Hansard on 25 September 2002 he also alleged that the person directing this officer - happens to be a former trade union representative. None of the senior officers in this area had ever worked for a trade union. Strike two; again the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had his facts totally wrong. He then made accusations that intimidatory tactics were used and threats were made against the Woodhams. Again, they said that was not the case and that they had no complaint that could be taken up. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made a range of wild and totally unsubstantiated allegations. However, there is an important issue here; that is, the scare campaign and the misinformation being put out has the potential to do much damage to small businesses. Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
I thank the member for Albany for his question. He has taken a keen interest in a range of cafes and restaurants in Albany and in some of the problems confronting them. He also personally knows Mr and Mrs Woodhams, the proprietors of the Beachside Cafe. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made a range of ludicrous and extreme accusations that, on investigation, have proven to be without foundation. He alleged that a senior investigating officer had shown no identification on entering this cafe. My office rang and spoke to Mrs Woodhams who said that when the officer entered the place, he introduced himself and handed over his business card. Strike one; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was absolutely wrong. In Hansard on 25 September 2002 he also alleged that the person directing this officer - happens to be a former trade union representative. None of the senior officers in this area had ever worked for a trade union. Strike two; again the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had his facts totally wrong. He then made accusations that intimidatory tactics were used and threats were made against the Woodhams. Again, they said that was not the case and that they had no complaint that could be taken up. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made a range of wild and totally unsubstantiated allegations. However, there is an important issue here; that is, the scare campaign and the misinformation being put out has the potential to do much damage to small businesses. Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has made a range of ludicrous and extreme accusations that, on investigation, have proven to be without foundation. He alleged that a senior investigating officer had shown no identification on entering this cafe. My office rang and spoke to Mrs Woodhams who said that when the officer entered the place, he introduced himself and handed over his business card. Strike one; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition was absolutely wrong. In Hansard on 25 September 2002 he also alleged that the person directing this officer - happens to be a former trade union representative. None of the senior officers in this area had ever worked for a trade union. Strike two; again the Deputy Leader of the Opposition had his facts totally wrong. He then made accusations that intimidatory tactics were used and threats were made against the Woodhams. Again, they said that was not the case and that they had no complaint that could be taken up. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition made a range of wild and totally unsubstantiated allegations. However, there is an important issue here; that is, the scare campaign and the misinformation being put out has the potential to do much damage to small businesses. Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
Already we are hearing about small businesses that are taking action over this fear campaign that has cost them money, because no change to their method of employing staff was needed. The fear campaign suggested that these businesses, which were already employing people under an award, had to change their method of employing people because the law had changed. No change has been made to the law that would affect people applying for employment under the award. People are taking unnecessary action because of this fear campaign. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition suggested that he wholeheartedly supports this artificial contracting arrangement that the Woodhams had entered into because it is good for business. From the little I know about the Woodhams, they seem to be good employers. Good employers can put in place their own arrangements, which work well. However, the law must be applied in the rare case of an employer who is not willing to provide decent terms of employment. These artificial contracting arrangements will be overthrown in the courts. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that we should have people under the age of 18 who are working in a cafe considered as independent contractors; that is, a company that is contracted to do the work. In some court cases, employees have been found to be contractors. However, in none of those cases did an employee have to report for work and do a specific job at a particular time. If a contractor says that he will wait at an employer’s restaurant at 10 o’clock in the morning when no customers are there, it is hardly a contracting arrangement that would suit the business. A contracting arrangement in this area is totally artificial because it comes down to a test of direction. If an employee can turn up and do the work when and as he wants, he is a contractor. If he turns up and waits on tables at a time set by the employer and to a set menu, he is not a contractor. The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
The Woodhams and other small businesses who accept these totally false accusations or propositions made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition are placing themselves in jeopardy. In one or three years, when a disgruntled employee makes a case against them, they could face a huge liability for unmet contractual benefits because he was not an employee. People will test this through the courts at some time. I acknowledge that cases of this form have already been tested in the courts and the employee was found to be a proper contractor. However, those cases related to services in which people worked in a more professional area and delivered the service in a time and in a way that they wished to as the contractor. That is not true for 17-year-olds working in a restaurant. Anyone who listens to the Liberal Party is likely to end up in very deep trouble, particularly if they are small business people. They need to be aware that the advice from the Liberal Party is doing a huge disservice to small business in this State.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.