Ms Patricia King:

There would not be a problem if an employee was with an employer and the offer was five hours, the employee was getting five hours and was not in a position whereby he or she is contracted for five hours but wanted for ten. In that case, the employer will only honour in contract the five hours and the employee is guaranteed only that. That is the point. There is little opportunity for a downside to this. That is why we have such difficulty understanding employers' opposition. In fairness, I watched the full session with the employers here. I heard a lot of the committee members question the employers. Senator Reilly made the point that he put to us about the unintended consequences involving students and the whole lot. We cannot understand what the employers are bringing as opposition to this. As Mr. Richie Browne has said, people are already getting paid the money and the patterns are already established. Therefore, it is about control. That is what the employers are objecting to. It is about holding on to the unbalanced relationship. The employers can work the employees for as long as they like, for as little as they like and for as much as they like. They have that in the low-pay area. I have publicly said that several times. It is for as long as they like, for as much as they like and for as little as they like, other than the minimum wage. That is what we are talking about here. The segment of the employment population subjected to that is a growing segment. That is the point. This is not about the burden of anything. It is about the loss of control. We have argued and lobbied that this is an entirely unbalanced area and needs to be dealt with. It is a very strong policy failure that it is not dealt with.