How Andrew McLachlan voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should introduce legislation that increases the powers and influence of trade unions in workplace relations

Division Andrew McLachlan Supporters vote Division outcome

25th Feb 2020, 4:43 PM – Senate Motions - Workplace Relations - Greyhound Resources

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Tasmanian Senator Anne Urquhart (Labor), which means it was successful. Motions like these don't make any legal changes on their own but are politically influential because they represent the will of the Senate.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) pay and conditions in supply chains are often characterised by a race to the bottom in which companies at the top drive down rates through their economic power,

(ii) in the resource industry, mining companies such as BHP, BHP Mitsubishi Alliance and BHP Mitsui Coal through their tenders for auxiliary work are the ultimate employer in the sector influencing the setting of pay and conditions across the sector,

(iii) workers at Greyhound Resources have in, good faith, engaged in negotiations with their employers for a new enterprise agreement,

(iv) workers at Greyhound Resources exercised their democratic right to take protected industrial action as part of the bargaining process,

(v) Greyhound Resources responded threatening to lock out any and all workers who took part in a legal industrial action, and

(vi) Greyhound Resources carried out this threat and is currently locking out those workers who took part in protected industrial action;

(b) calls on Australian mining companies to recognise their role as the ultimate employer in the sector and their influence on the rates and conditions across their industry; and

(c) supports the workers of Greyhound Resources who are currently locked out by their employer and calls for the end to the lockout so that negotiations can continue in good faith.

No Yes Passed by a small majority

How "voted very strongly against" 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 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 1 0 10
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 0 10

*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 = 0 / 10 = 0.0%.

And then