How Bert Van Manen voted compared to someone who believes that there should be no penalty rates when employees work on Sundays or public holidays

Division Bert Van Manen Supporters vote Division outcome

26th Oct 2017, 10:31 AM – Representatives Fair Work Laws Amendment (Proper Use of Worker Benefits) Bill 2017 - Report from Federation Chamber - Penalty rates

Show detail

The majority voted against an amendment requested by the Federation Chamber (which is a debating committee). This means the amendment failed and the original question was agreed to.

The original question was that the House give the bill a second reading (which essentially means that the House agrees with the main idea and can now discuss it in more detail).

Amendment text

That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

“whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House calls on the Government to:

(1) abandon its support of the decision of the Fair Work Commission to cut penalty rates because it will mean nearly 700,000 Australians will have their take home pay cut by up to $77 a week; and

(2) legislate to prevent the decision from taking effect to stop Australians from having their penalty rates cut”

What does this bill do?

The bill:

Amends the Fair Work Act 2009 to:

prohibit terms of a modern award or an enterprise agreement requiring or permitting contributions for the benefit of an employee to be made to any fund other than a superannuation fund, a registered worker entitlement fund or a registered charity;

require any term of a modern award or enterprise agreement that names a worker entitlement fund or insurance product to provide for an employee to choose another fund or insurance product;

prohibit any term of a modern award, enterprise agreement or contract of employment permitting or requiring employee contributions to an election fund for an industrial association; and

prohibit any action with the intent to coerce an employer to pay amounts to a particular worker entitlement fund, superannuation fund, training fund, welfare fund or employee insurance scheme;

Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 to:

require registered organisations to adopt, and periodically review, financial management policies;

require registered organisations to keep credit card records and report certain loans, grants and donations;

require specific disclosure by registered organisations and employers of the financial benefits obtained by them and persons linked to them in connection with employee insurance products, welfare fund arrangements and training fund arrangements; and

introduce a range of new penalties relating to compliance with financial management, disclosure and reporting requirements; and

Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act 1986, Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 and Taxation Administration Act 1953 to make consequential amendments.

No No Not passed by a small majority

11th May 2017, 12:11 PM – Representatives Fair Work Amendment (Protecting Vulnerable Workers) Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Keep penalty rates

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Labor MP Brendan O'Connor, which means it wasn't successful. The motion asked for the Government to protect penalty rates.

Motion text

That all the words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

“whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:

(1) notes that although the government pretends through the bill to care about vulnerable workers, those workers who earn penalty rates are also vulnerable as a result of the Fair Work Commission decision to cut penalty rates, a decision which the government supports; and

(2) calls on the government to:

(a) abandon its support of the Fair Work Commission decision to cut penalty rates because it will mean nearly 700,000 Australians will have their take home pay cut by up to $77 a week; and

(b) legislate to prevent the Fair Work Commission decision from taking effect, in order to stop Australians from having their penalty rates cut”.

No No Not passed by a small majority

How "voted very strongly for" is worked out

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get 50 points, less important votes get 10 points, and less important votes for which the MP was absent get 2 points. In important votes the MP gets awarded the full 50 points for voting the same as the policy, 0 points for voting against the policy, and 25 points for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets 10 points for voting with the policy, 0 points for voting against, and 1 (out of 2) if absent.

Then, the number gets converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.

No of votes Points Out of
Most important votes (50 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 2 20 20
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 20 20

*Pressure of other work means MPs or Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less important vote makes a disproportionatly small difference.

Agreement score = MP's points / total points = 20 / 20 = 100%.

And then