Senator BROWN(10.01 p.m.) —There is a vast difference between an employer being entitled not to pay an employee and the provision now in this legislation which says that an employer must not pay an employee. That is what Senator Margetts is on about. In relation to the request of Senator Murray, the answer from Senator Campbell simply says that what Senator Margetts is saying is correct.

Can I go back to the supposition that an employer might ask an employee to do something which turns out to be illegal—for example, to work at a new piece of machinery which is not reaching adequate safety standards. That is something itself which will be a matter of dispute until it is determined by an arbitrator. But, in the meantime, if the employer is sure in her or his mind that the machinery is okay—notwithstanding what the employee thinks and notwithstanding the fact that at a later hearing it turns out that the employer is wrong—he or she will have to dock the employee to penalise them. It will be up to the employee to get to the court to justify the action they are taking. The whole weight of responsibility goes across to the employee considering a work-to-rules campaign or some other action short of a strike.

The question Senator Margetts posed to the Australian Democrats at the outset therefore stands. Will they consider at least taking a furlough overnight to get independent advice on what is turning out to be a very critical matter for the Australian workplace?