Senator ABETZ (Minister for Fisheries, Forestry and Conservation) (7:46 PM) —I thought I had explained it prior to Senator Campbell’s intervention, but clearly not sufficiently or not eloquently enough, so allow me to try again. In relation to this process an employee voluntarily signs an agreement, as does the employer, and it gets submitted to the Workplace Authority Director. The Workplace Authority Director then puts his or her ruler over the agreement. That ruler is called ‘fairness.’ It is a check, if you like, by an independent person, to ascertain whether a different set of eyes and a different mind, against certain criteria, determines that it is a fair agreement. In the event that it is fair, they will be notified that a determination has been made that it is fair—without any reasons given, but that it is deemed to be fair. In the event that it is deemed to be unfair, the parties will be contacted with suggestions and helpful hints. I may have to look at the actual terminology that is to be applied.

Senator Wong —It refers to ‘how the agreement could be varied to pass the fairness test’.

Senator ABETZ —Thank you very much. The Workplace Authority Director then has to provide advice on ‘how the agreement could be varied to pass the fairness test (including by way of an undertaking)’. As a result, if you were provided advice as to how the agreement could be varied to pass the fairness test, it stands to reason that the unfairness originally must be pointed out and that the way to overcome that unfairness is by having other provisions in the agreement. So the parties would be told quite clearly why the agreement is deemed to be unfair.