Self Employed Australia

"Everyone needs an Advocate"

“Everyone needs an Advocate”

The Gig Economy

Campaigning is under way—Defending your right to Be Your Own Boss

by

campaigningWe thought we’d give you an understanding of the mechanics of our campaign to try and stop the Albanese government from implementing its ‘employee-like’ agenda.

We explained early in May that the government had started the implementation process with the release of the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations’ (DEWR) consultation paper.

Our first task was to assess and respond to the paper. We lodged our long submission (11,000 words) to DEWR and in late May provided you a brief overview. The reason for the long submission is simple. The government is throwing up a concept—‘employee-like’—which at first glance could appear reasonable. But it’s only when you delve into the detail of what this means that a full understanding is possible. And it means a direct attack upon your right to be your own boss, to be self-employed.

The next phase in our campaign started last week. This involves focusing on the independent Senators that the government needs to pass any legislation in the Senate. There are seven independent Senators. The government needs four of them to pass legislation.

Last week we began the engagement process with the Senators. It needs to be understood that all Senators and MPs are incredibly busy trying to comprehend a huge range of complex issues. Our responsibility is to present our arguments clearly, factually and as concisely as possible. To this end we’ve produced a four-page summary of our position.

Last week we had initial discussions with staff of some Senators and had one Senator ask us to come to Canberra to explain the issues in person. We did this and had a very productive discussion. It was pleasing to have this level of interest.

We’ve been conducting pro-self-employed advocacy campaigns for over 20 years and we’ve learnt one thing. It’s essential to sit down with Senators and MPs and explain one’s position face-to-face. We’re committed to this. And it’s not just independent Senators we seek to talk to, but also the government itself, the opposition and independent MPs.

This costs money, of course, and this is where your membership fees go.

For example, a one-day trip to Canberra (from Melbourne) usually involves:

  • $500 in airfares, $100 for buses, taxis, etc.

And staying overnight in Canberra (if needed) is expensive during Parliament sitting days—usually starting at around $250 a night (just for basic accommodation!!!)

The government plans to introduce its contentious legislation later this year. To run our advocacy campaign, we anticipate that around eight to ten trips to Canberra will be required before years’ end.

If you’d like to help fund any of those trips, you can do so through our dedicated campaign membership link here.

There’s quite a ‘battle’ going on, with the ACTU (unions) putting out a very aggressive ‘research’ paper which attacks the High Court and is hugely misleading on many fronts. It’s this sort of thing that we need to explain to Senators and MPs otherwise the union agenda will prevail.

We’ll keep you informed.

Labor’s ‘employee-like’ agenda assaults competition law

by

employee-likeWe informed you on 7 May that the Federal government’s anti-small business plan was progressing. It released a Consultation Paper on 13 April requiring submissions by 12 May. We’ve lodged our submission opposing the planned legislation. The submission is here.

Sorry, but the submission is long—yep, 11,000 words.

The reason for the length is that the government’s plan is presented as if it’s a ‘tweaking’ of law and of limited application. It’s not. It’s a massive assault against the very principles and practices of contract that determine your right to be your own boss, to be self-employed. This can only be understood by understanding the detail.

We’ll explain the detail in shorter ‘chunks’ through this and a series of future news alerts. If you have queries, please contact us.

Competition law ‘protects’ self-employed, small business people

Today we cover the grave threats posed to competition policy and law, the jurisdictional authority of the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission (ACCC), and the right of people in Australia to earn their income as a small business person.

Competition law regulates commercial contracts.

Employment law regulates employment contracts.

  • The government’s plan is to allow employment regulation to regulate commercial contracts.

This is a massive step across a fundamental threshold.

The plan is to legislatively redefine commercial contracts to be employment contracts on the alleged grounds that some self-employed people are ‘employee-like’.

This defies the High Court’s declaration in February 2022 (Personnel Case) that:

  • “The employment relationship with which the common law is concerned must be a legal It is not a social or psychological concept like friendship…”

In effect, the plan is to ‘invent’ a new legislative contract form that is outside common law to thwart common law contract.

This also breaches Australia’s International Labour Organisation obligations where the ILO declared in 2006 that:

  • “National policy for protection of workers in an employment relationship should not interfere with true civil and commercial relationships…”

Competition clash

The provisions will immediately set up a clash between competition law and employment regulation. Specifically, the ACCC and the Fair Work Commission (FWC) will both be required to regulate commercial contracts that have been declared ‘employee-like’, but each with different and opposing public policy objectives. The ACCC to prevent collusion over pricing and ensure competition. The FWC to facilitate price collusion thereby creating the circumstances for anti-competitive behaviour.

This is being done under the pretext that some self-employed people need ‘protections’.

But protections are already in place:

  1. Sham contracting laws in Australia are possibly the strongest in the world.
  2. The Independent Contractors Act outlaws payment below similar pay to an employee.
  3. ‘Beefed up’ unfair contract laws begin in November 2023 and will be handled by the ACCC.
  4. Collective bargaining for the self-employed is already available through the ACCC.
  5. Improved, easier dispute resolution can be made available through small business ombudsmen, etc.
  6. New ‘pay on time’ laws are currently being considered.

We are now undertaking a major advocacy campaign directed at Federal MHRs and Senators. We’ll keep you informed.

Labor’s agenda to outlaw the self-employed – Here it comes!!

by

Labor's-agenda-outlawWe’ve alerted you in the past to the Albanese government’s plan to deny people the right to be self-employed. It’s an attack upon your basic freedom to decide how you earn your income. That attack plan is now unfolding.

The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR) has released a consultation paper on the implementation of Labor’s plan. We’re preparing a detailed submission (due on 12 May). Legislation is set for the second half of this year.

Be very clear. We totally reject this agenda. It’s bad on many fronts. We’ll explain the multiple problems progressively over the following weeks.

We have started talking to Senators and MPs about why this is so bad and should be stopped. We’ll be very actively pushing to defend the right to be self-employed.

We’ve prepared a summary of the DEWR consultation paper. We’ve tried to reflect what they are saying accurately.

In broad summary, Labor’s plan is to:

  • Treat the commercial contract used by self-employed people as an employment contract.
  • Regulate self-employed people through the Fair Work Commission, thus creating conflict with commercial law and regulation by the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission. The DEWR papers says that this will be done on a limited selective basis. But those limits are as yet unknown.

Frankly, we see our campaign as perhaps the most important one that we have conducted in SEA’s 24-year history. We must attempt to stop this.

We argue that Labor’s plan is a recipe for commercial contract confusion and uncertainty. We find the consultation paper to be a confused hotchpotch itself, as it is forced to weave a path through well-established legal, regulatory and policy principles and practices. This is so because the plan would generate conflict with those principles and practices on a wide scale.

At this stage we seek to understand the detail of Labor’s agenda. The difficulty is that the agenda is wrapped up in seemingly good intentions which mask its true consequences.

Many people have asked us for more information. We suggest that you read our summary first and see what you think. We’ll release our analysis progressively.

Gig workers alert – ATO tracking your income

by

gig-workersThis is to alert SEA members and subscribers about new laws affecting you if you earn income through ‘gig’ platforms.  As of 1 July 2023, the platforms will be required to report your income to the Australian Taxation Office. The move is directed to identifying undeclared income and will eventually apply to GST compliance.

Legislation for the Sharing Economy Reporting Regime passed Parliament in December 2022. The ATO is having to design the implementation of the new laws quite quickly. The ATO is seeking to implement this properly and is conducting industry and ‘stakeholder’ consultations on this. We’re involved in these consultations and have raised a number of issues.

To give you some context, the new reporting rules are targeting the (approximately) 970,000 people, or 7 per cent of the workforce of 13.9 million, who earn income using gig platforms. Only 0.19 per cent of the workforce, however, report earning all their income from gig. That’s according to the comprehensive inquiry into gig work done by the Victorian government.

Consequently, the ATO’s gig income reporting regime is overwhelmingly going to affect people who use gig as top-up income. If you’re using gig for income, you’ll need to ensure that you’re reporting that income correctly.

The issues we’ve raised in the consultation so far include the following:

Data collection: The gig platforms will be required to report data other than simply financial—mainly, we’re told, for identification purposes. We asked if the type of data required could be clarified.

GST: How will GST reporting operate? Will gig platforms be required to understand gig workers’ GST threshold limits?

Gross or net income: We assume that reporting will require net income declarations. That is, income after platforms take out all platform and related expenses.

Dispute management: This is our top query.

What if a platform incorrectly reports income or reports income that does not match the ATO’s prescriptions?

Our concerns here are strongly linked to the abuse of social welfare recipients in the Robo Debt scandal. In that case the ATO provided income data to Centrelink which then used that data to allege incomes that were false. The government’s dispute-resolution process was essentially non-existent, resulting in huge abuse of welfare recipients. The same potential exists with this new reporting system—namely, if there are reporting errors, then the gig worker is hopelessly disadvantaged in having them investigated and fixed.

We have to say that the ATO was/is very receptive to our concerns and queries.

If you earn income through gig, we’re keen to hear from you if you have concerns or can identify issues. Drop a line to me (Ken Phillips – kennethnormanphillips@gmail.com)

You can read more from Ken Phillips on his Substack Self-Employed Aren’t Stupid site, including ‘A tale of 2 Croissants.’

Self Employed. Marxism. Corruption. Not Above The Law

by

discernableAt Self-Employed Australia we’re covering what seems to be a wide range of topics. In fact, these all come back to a central ‘thing’ that we seek to protect—namely, your right to be self-employed should you wish. That is, your right to Be Your Own Boss.

One of our great supporters is Discernable, an on-line blog television channel run by Matt Wong. Matt’s a true self-employed, small business innovator. He’s invested his own money, time and effort to pursue a vision that says that media news and issues coverage doesn’t have to be slogan-slamming but can undertake patient, intelligent coverage of issues.

If you haven’t watched Discernable we highly recommend doing so. If you’re like us, you’re likely to find the long (frequently 2 hour) interviews engaging, addictive and binge-watchable. The stories that come from Matt’s guests are fabulously insightful.

Matt has interviewed SEA’s Ken Phillips on several occasions covering our Not Above The Law campaign and more. Just this week Matt interviewed Ken and SEA chairman Nick Karamouzis.

The interview is available here.

discernable

We covered a range of topics. And to make it easy for you here are the timeslots of the issues we covered.

marxism

We trust our interview gives you a good handle on our campaign efforts.

‘A Tale of 2 Croissants’ and Being a Little Bit Pregnant(?)

by

substackI let you know a little while ago that I’ve started posting as a Substack writer. Substack is for obsessive writers (like me). I’ve called my Substack SELF-EMPLOYED AREN’T STUPID!

Substack gives me a platform to write about self-employed issues, ideas, concepts and thoughts that complement what we do at Self-Employed Australia.

So here are some thoughts that might interest you from SELF-EMPLOYED AREN’T STUPID!

A tale of 2 croissants

croissantsI explain that:

“In my home city of Melbourne there’s a near-inner-city suburb that’s rapidly changed from working-class to ‘woke-well-to-do’ class. At the outer edge of the suburb there’s one street that seems to divide the two classes. On the working-class side of the street is a popular bakery run by a Vietnamese family. Not quite half a kilometre away (in the woke-well-to-do section), is another bakery.

The Vietnamese bakery sells croissants for $4.00.

The woke-well-to-do bakery sells croissants for $6.50.”

Read more   

A serious look at being a ‘little bit pregnant’

surpriseThis article looks at the labour academic argument that self-employed people can be a ‘little bit an employee’.  I explain that:

For a long time, Australian unions, labour academics and their political fellow travellers have sought to cut away at the right of people to earn their income through the commercial contract. The Albanese government has committed to doing this later in 2023.

And explain the history and thinking around this idea.

Read more

Independence and the Death of Employment

bookYou may not be aware that I published a book on this in 2008. I’ve decided to make this available through Substack in serialised, chapter format. I’ll progressively release chapters. In this first release I provide the book’s Introduction. In it I quote Roman Emperor Caligula who stated:

“Bear in mind that I can treat anyone exactly as I please”.  That’s real power.

The modern employment contract is a contract of control and power, of one party over another. Few realise this. And much of my (obsessive) journey is to argue against such power and control.

As you are a subscriber to, or member of, Self-Employed Australia, you’ve become part of, or maybe are committed to, the campaign to defend self-employment—that is, escaping the control and power over you that comes with ‘employment’.

I invite you to subscribe to my Substack SELF-EMPLOYED AREN’T STUPID! blog and join me on the further development of this journey.

Labor to deny self-employed access to protections

by

protections-deniedThe Albanese government’s determination to legislate an ‘employee-like’ definition will introduce radical law that will deny protections to Australia’s self-employed people.

The government says that it doesn’t want to create any ‘unintended consequences.’ Whether the consequences of its actions are intended or unintended is irrelevant. Denial of protections is what will occur.

Self-employed people currently enjoy protections from:

Further, Australia has built a system of cheap, quick dispute resolution through the network of state and federal small business commissioners and ombudsmen.

This entire protection system will be thrown into chaos and confusion with the creation of an ‘employee-like’ definition.

This is because self-employed people are regulated and protected through commercial law which is entirely different to how employees are dealt with under employment law.

The government’s agenda will defy decisions of the global protector of workers’ rights, the International Labour Organisation. In 2006 the ILO declared principles which stated that it was necessary to:

  • protect the freedom of independent contractors to enter into services contracts;
  • recognise independent contracting as a legitimate form of work arrangement that is primarily commercial; and
  • prevent interference with the terms of genuine independent services contracts.

These principles are embedded in the Australian Independent Contractors Act.

And more.

On certainty

In February 2022, The Australian High Court made the most important decision on the definition of self-employment in more than 50 years. In its decision the Court stated that:

“…It is the task of the courts to promote certainty with respect to a relationship of such fundamental importance.” (at par 58)

The government’s ‘employee-like’ agenda will create uncertainty, the very opposite of what the High Court says needs to be achieved.

Legal relationship is not social/psychological

The High Court also said:

“The employment relationship with which the common law is concerned must be a legal relationship. It is not a social or psychological concept like friendship.”

The government wants to turn a social or psychological concept (‘employee-like’) into a legal form through legislation. This defies and erodes the common-law distinction between employment and self-employment which the High Court says must remain distinct.

Bad consultation

The government’s recently announced ‘consultation’ on the issue does not raise or seek to discuss any of these vital issues. This is not ‘consultation’. It is a process of seeking to ram through an agenda that is bad for self-employed, small business people.

We’d appreciate any support you can afford in our campaign to defend the right to be self-employed. It’s important.

Defending the self-employed: 2023 Campaign to counter the creeping attack!

by

defendingThere is no doubt that, in the second half of this year, major legislation is going to be pushed through Federal Parliament that will do harm to self-employed people.

We know this because of the government’s stated agenda. In a significant speech to the National Press Club on 1 February 2023, the Workplace Relations Minister, Tony Burke, laid out the government’s wide-ranging agenda. There are four items on that agenda list that we must oppose.

These are:

  • The creation of ‘employee-like’ legal definitions for self-employed people.
  • Limiting the self-employed’s capacity/rights to engage in the gig economy.
  • Imposing business-crushing ‘employment’ regulations on owner-driver truck drivers.
  • Giving the Fair Work Commission power over self-employed people.

Each of these agenda items is presented by the government as a form of ‘protection’ for the self-employed. But in fact these items reduce the right of Australians to be their own boss. There’s the harm.

We have long fought for protections for self-employed people. But these protections can and must come through commercial law and regulation.

The government’s approach on the items listed above is instead a process of denying the full right of people to be self-employed and instead forcing people into employee-like situations. This approach stems from an ideological view that only employment regulation provides workers with protection. This is a wrong, narrow and harmful perspective. Wherever this is done, great harm is inflicted on self-employed workers. Think of the AB5 laws in California which harm truckers and many others. We must try to prevent such harm being done in Australia.

We’re not saying that the Albanese government is all bad on the self-employed front. In fact, we were and are full of praise for its speedy passing of the ‘beefed up’ unfair contract (protection) laws in October last year. This is exactly the model of protection laws that self-employed (own boss) workers need—namely, protections under commercial law. But where the government heads in the wrong direction we need to oppose it.

Today we’re announcing the start of our campaign. This means:

  • Writing submissions (even if not invited to do so).
  • Communicating directly with government advisers and MPs.
  • Seeking support from the Coalition opposition and Senate/House independents.

One thing that we have learnt over many years is that if we don’t go to Canberra and walk the halls of parliament knocking on doors, presenting our views, and raising awareness, then we will not get anywhere.

We’re asking for your $ support. This campaigning costs money. It requires effort, persistence and money. We will put in the effort and the persistence. But our only revenue is from you—our members/supporters.

You can contribute/Join here as a:

  • Full member ($44 a month)
  • Standard member ($22 a month)
  • Campaign member (you choose $)

More information will follow as our campaign unfolds.

PS: You can also follow Ken Phillips through his Self-Employed Aren’t Stupid, Substack postings.

Victorian Labor promises to destroy gig work and self-employment

by

destroy-gig-workIn late October this year the Victorian Labor Government announced new gig laws it intends to introduce. The promised laws have all the nice-sounding language of ‘rights’ for gig self-employed people, but in fact the laws amount to a stripping of rights.

We’ve seen this sort of cunning stuff before. In California, in 2020, new laws came into effect that outlawed the use of self-employed people. That is, the structure of the laws didn’t ban people being their own boss. But by making it illegal to use self-employed people, California destroyed the incomes of people who worked as their own boss.

The promised Victorian Labor laws would perform a similar underhand trick. Effectively the laws would impose huge union control and centralised regulation over gig platforms, thereby destroying their business models. The platforms would become unprofitable and be forced to leave Victoria.

This is why Deliveroo recently closed in Australia. They’d done deals with unions that made their business unviable. Close down was the answer!

And who suffers? Yep, you got it. It’s the thousands of self-employed people—try students, retirees and the rest—who use gig platforms to top up their income. Only 0.19 percent of gig workers use gig for their full-time work. Everyone else uses gig for income top-up.

The promised Victorian Labor law is a business destroyer. It’s a policy that says that Labor despises people who work as their own boss, working when they want to work. It’s a policy of hate toward small business people.

We saw this before in Victoria when, around 2017, the Victorian Labor Government forced the breaking of the contracts of hundreds of self-employed cleaners who had direct contracts to clean schools. Labor forced these ‘own boss’ cleaners out of business and handed the contracts to big business. Cleaners were forced to become union members or have no work.

The promised Victorian Labor gig destruction laws would:

  • Force gig platforms into industrial-style ‘negotiations’ over how they manage their business and what the terms of their contracts are. This process would give unions power over gig platforms and gig workers.
  • Force gig platforms to change their contracts.
  • Destroy the entire concept and practice of ‘offer and acceptance of contract’ which is the core fundamental of commercial activity.
  • Impose pay rates.

And more.

In effect, self-employed gig people would retain their theoretical ‘right’ to be self-employed. But gig work and income would simply disappear. This is a Labor policy that attacks the ability of low-income people to find income through being their own boss. It’s pretty disgusting!

This commentary should in no way be construed or taken as an endorsement (or otherwise) of any political candidate or party or as a suggestion as to how anyone should vote or not vote at the 26 November Victorian state election. 

Government report: Don’t destroy self-employed gig workers. We agree

by

report-gigDespite the Albanese government’s description of self-employed ‘gig’ work as a ‘cancer’, a recent government report (interim) says that such work and workers should not be ‘stymied’. We totally agree and have made a supporting submission.

The Productivity Commission is a high-powered federal government economic research think-tank. What it says is important.

In its (interim) report it studies and makes recommendations on the gig/platform economy. It says:

Regulation should evolve to meet the workplace relations challenge of innovative new business models, without stymying their potential contributions to productivity.

This is a heap of common sense. We hope the Albanese government takes note. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater!!

Our submission makes key points of fact.

There’s no confusion between an employee and a self-employed person:

  • An employee earns income through the employment contract.
  • A self-employed (independent contractor) person earns income through the commercial contract.

This legal fact is supported by research conducted by the International Labour Organisation and by international standards to which Australia is a signatory. Like the Productivity Commission, the ILO says:

National policy for protection of workers in an employment relationship should not interfere with true civil and commercial relationships…

We say that employment-structured firms are under competitive threat from gig/platforms and self-employed people. These firms are marshalling their well-entrenched political power to stop or limit the competition for power. This explains the ‘third way’ push which is on the Albanese government’s agenda.

The ‘third way’ push is highly dangerous. It has been rejected by the ILO and is causing great harm in the UK, for example. We explain this in our submission.

We also say that self-employed people are entitled to ‘protections’ but through commercial regulation not employment regulation. For example, protections are already available under laws covering unfair contracts, work safety, collective bargaining (under competition rules), minimum rates guarantees and dispute resolution.

But there is urgent need to reform the workers’ compensation schemes, for example, to allow individual self-employed people to register directly with the schemes without being forced into ‘employment’. Currently, self-employed people are banned from workers’ compensation, a glaring discrimination.

We explain these issues and more in our submission.