Mr. John Douglas:

I am the general secretary of Mandate, the bar and retail workers' union. We welcome the Bill. It is good and has the potential to address most of the abuses and exploitation found not only in the retail sector but also in the hospitality, education and, as Mr. Bell pointed out, health sectors.

Does the question on a balanced approach show a lack of understanding of the problem? One cannot balance exploitation against workers' rights. There is no equation - it is exploitation and an abuse of power by employers. How can any worker expect to live without knowing what his or her wages will be from week to week? The only contractual commitment a sizable number of retailers make to an employee on starting is that he or she will work 15 hours per week. People might work 39 hours per week for two, three or ten years, but if they move up the service scale, their rates will increase, they will join a union or they will say something they should not and their hours will be changed suddenly. Not only will their days change, but their rosters and times will also change, with a dramatic reduction in their working hours to 15, the only commitment employers are prepared to make. This has nothing to do with balance; it is sheer exploitation. Every worker should at least have some idea of how much he or she will earn from week to week. Otherwise, employees will be blocked from taking out loans. Bank managers look at their contracts, see that they are only guaranteed 15 hours per week and do not care how many hours they actually work. This issue must be addressed. In asking about a balanced approach one misses the problem.

With the exception of one that, under the Chairman's guidance, I will not mention, we have reached banded hours agreements with the majority of retailers along the same lines as the provisions included in the Bill. If retailers can operate within the guidelines and have the necessary flexibility to run their businesses on a profitable basis-----