Federal Register of Legislation - Australian Government

Primary content

A Bill for an Act to amend the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010, and for related purposes
Administered by: Treasury
For authoritative information on the progress of bills and on amendments proposed to them, please see the House of Representatives Votes and Proceedings, and the Journals of the Senate as available on the Parliament House website.
Registered 19 Mar 2014
Introduced HR 19 Mar 2014
Table of contents.

2013-2014

 

THE PARLIAMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

 

 

 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 

 

 

PAID PARENTAL LEAVE AMENDMENT BILL 2014

 

 

 

 

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

 

 

 

 

(Circulated by the authority of the
Minister for Small Business, the Hon Bruce Billson MP)

 


Table of contents

Glossary.............................................................................................................. 1

General outline and financial impact............................................................ 3

Chapter 1              Removal of the Mandatory Employer Role in Administering the Current Paid Parental Leave Scheme..................................................... 5

Chapter 2              Regulation impact statement............................................ 13

Chapter 3              Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights............ 21

 

Do not remove section break.


 

The following abbreviations and acronyms are used throughout this explanatory memorandum.

Abbreviation

Definition

ABN

Australian business number

DHS

Department of Human Services

Paid Parental Leave Act

Paid Parental Leave Act 2010

PLP

parental leave pay

PPL

Paid Parental Leave

Secretary

Secretary of the Department of Human Services

SSAT

Social Services Appeals Tribunal


Removal of employer paymaster role in administering the Paid Parental Leave scheme

To ease administrative burdens on business, the Paid Parental Leave (PPL) legislation will be amended to remove the requirement for employers to provide Government funded parental leave pay to their eligible long-term employees.

From 1 July 2014, employees will be paid directly by the Department of Human Services (DHS), unless an employer opts in to provide parental leave pay to its employees and an employee agrees for their employer to pay them.

Date of effect1 July 2014.

Proposal announcedThis measure was announced as an election commitment in the 2013 Federal Election policy document, Our Plan: Real Solutions for all Australians.

Financial impact$0.7 million over five years.

Human rights implications:  This Bill does not raise any human rights issue. See Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights — Chapter 3, paragraphs 3.1 to 3.5.

Compliance cost impact:  Compliance cost savings to business and the not-for-profit sector of $48 million.

Summary of regulation impact statement

Regulation impact on business

ImpactFor employers who consider the employer role to be an unnecessary burden, this option would provide an early removal of the mandatory nature of the current employer role.

This option would also provide an opportunity to monitor employer involvement and any issues raised through an ‘opt-in’ role well before commencement of the enhanced PPL scheme from 1 July 2015.

Main points:

       This measure has no impact on regulatory or compliance costs for employees, as they would still undertake the same claim process as currently required.

       This measure would result in a shift of administration costs from employers to Government.  Currently DHS administer payments for around 24 per cent of employees (non-mandatory employees or recipients who do not have an employer), however under the measure they would be responsible for making the majority of payments to employees.  The additional cost to Government to implement the measure is $7 million over five years.

Do not remove section break.


Outline of chapter

                            To ease administrative burdens on business, the Paid Parental Leave (PPL) legislation will be amended to remove the requirement for employers to provide Government funded parental leave pay to their eligible long-term employees.

                            From 1 July 2014, employees will be paid directly by the Department of Human Services (DHS), unless an employer opts in to provide parental leave pay (PLP) to its employees and an employee agrees to their employer paying them

Context of amendments

                            Currently under the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010 (Paid Parental Leave Act), in the majority of cases, employers are required to provide parental leave pay to their eligible long-term employees.  The Secretary of the Department of Human Services (the Secretary) must make an employer determination that a person’s employer is to pay the person’s instalments of PLP, if the Secretary is satisfied that certain conditions are met.

                            However, an employer determination can be made despite not all of the conditions being satisfied if an employer has made an election to ‘opt-in’ to pay instalments of PLP to the employee and the employee consents to the employer paying the instalments.  If an employer determination is in force for an employer and their employee, the employer must pay instalments of PLP to their employee.

                            In their feedback to the review, employer and industry groups generally did not support the employer role, particularly in relation to small business.  These stakeholders considered the employer role places an unnecessary administrative burden on business, and any benefits to employers in terms of employee retention were not commensurate with the administrative burden imposed.

Summary of new law

                            From 1 July 2014, payments of parental leave pay will be made by DHS, unless an employer chooses to ‘opt in’ to manage the payment of PLP to their employees and their employee agrees for the employer to pay them.  This will go some way towards easing the administrative burden on business.

                            The amendments will only require an employer to provide instalments of PLP to a person if an employer determination is in force for the employer and the employee.  An employer determination can only be made if the employer has made an election to pay instalments, that election applies to the person, and certain other conditions are met, including the employee agreeing to their employer paying them.  PPL funding amounts will then be transferred to the employer from DHS for payment to the employee, consistent with current arrangements.

                            If an employer determination is made for a particular employer and employee, but the employer no longer wishes to pay PLP for that particular employee, the employer can decline the paymaster role.  If this happens, DHS will pay the employee.

                            To reflect the non-mandatory nature of this role, employers who do not respond to a notice of an employer determination will no longer be potentially subject to a compliance notice.  Review of an employer determination is no longer required because the employer can simply decline the paymaster role.

Comparison of key features of new law and current law

New law

Current law

Employers do not have to be the paymaster in administering the parental leave payments.

Employers are required to be the paymaster in administering parental leave payments.

Detailed explanation of new law

                            Items 1 to 3 amend section 4, which is the Guide to the Act, to reflect the changes made by this Schedule.

                            Items 4, 5 and 8 amend certain definitions in section 6, to reflect the changes made by items 11, 21, 22 and 32 of this Schedule.

                            Item 6 repeals the definition of employer determination decision in section 6, as this was only relevant to review of these decisions and is no longer required as a consequence of the amendment made by item 41.

                            Item 7 inserts a new definition of non-acceptance notice in section 6, which is defined in paragraph 103(1)(b), as amended by item 21.

                            Item 9 amends the note under subsection 64(1) by removing the reference to ‘section 93’, consequential to repeal of that section by item 15.

                            Item 10 amends the third paragraph in section 83, which is the Guide to Part 3-3, relating to payment of instalments by the Secretary.

                            Item 11 repeals subsection 84(3), to omit reference to an employer having made an application for review of the decision to make an employer determination.

                            Item 12 repeals and substitutes a new heading for section 85, titled ‘Payment of arrears — employer determination revoked before coming into force’.  This item is consequential to item 13.

                            Item 13 repeals and substitutes new subsection 85(1), omitting reference to subsection 84(3), but otherwise re-enacting the subsection unchanged.

                            Item 14 amends subsection 85(3) and is consequential to items 12 and 13.

                            Item 15 repeals section 93, and removes the requirement for the Secretary to pay instalments because an employer has sought review of an employer determination.

                            Item 16 repeals and substitutes a new section 100, which is a guide to Part 3-5 of the Paid Parental Leave Act and gives a brief outline of the matters dealt with in the Part, relating to employer determinations.  The changes to section 100 reflect the amendments made by items 17 to 32.

                            Item 17 repeals and substitutes new paragraphs 101(1)(b) and (c).  Subsection 101(1) provides that the Secretary must make an employer determination that a person’s employer is to pay the person instalments if the Secretary is satisfied that certain conditions have been met.

                            New paragraph 101(1)(b) provides that, when making an employer determination, one of the conditions of which the Secretary must be satisfied is that the person’s employer has made an election (or ‘opted in’) under section 109 to pay instalments and that election applies to the person.

                            New paragraph 101(1)(c) provides that, when making an employer determination, the Secretary must also be satisfied that the person has consented in the claim form to the employer paying instalments of parental leave pay to the person.

                            Item 18 repeals paragraph 101(1)(e), which removes the condition that an employer has an Australian business number (ABN), when the Secretary makes an employer determination.  The requirement to have an ABN is now provided by subsection 109(1) (item 31).

                            Item 19 amends paragraph 101(1)(f), and is consequential to items 17 and 18.

                            Item 20 repeals subsection 101(2), and is consequential to the changes made by item 17.

                            Item 21 repeals and substitutes new section 103, which sets out the required employer response to a notice of an employer determination.

                            New subsection 103(1) provides that, if an employer is given a notice under section 102 that an employer determination has been made, the employer may, within the period referred to in subsection 103(2) (which is normally 14 days):

       give the Secretary a written notice (the acceptance notice) that complies with section 104; or

       give the Secretary a non-acceptance notice, orally or in writing, declaring that the employer does not accept the employer’s obligations to pay instalments to the person.

                            New subsection 103(2) provides that, for the purposes of subsection (1), the period is 14 days, or such longer period allowed by the Secretary, after the date of the notice given under section 102.

                            Item 22 repeals subsections 104(2) and (5), which provide the requirement to have bank account information in the acceptance notice.  This requirement is now provided in paragraph 109(2)(b) (item 32).

                            Item 23 repeals section 105, removing the requirement for the employer to give bank account and pay cycle information after an internal review or review by the Social Services Appeals Tribunal (SSAT), as this is no longer relevant.

                            Item 24 amends subsection 107(1), and is consequential to item 27.

                            Item 25 repeals the heading to subsection 107(2).

                            Item 26 amends subsection 107(2) by omitting the reference to ‘a compliance notice given under section 157’.

                            Item 27 repeals subsection 107(3), and is consequential to item 23.

                            Item 28 inserts a new item 1A in the table in subsection 108(1).  New table item 1A provides that the Secretary must revoke an employer determination made for a person and the person’s employer if the Secretary is satisfied that the employer has given a non‑acceptance notice for the person under paragraph 103(b).  In this situation, the revocation comes into force on the day of the revocation.

                            Item 29 amends item 2 in column 1 of the table in subsection 108(1), and is consequential to item 21.

                            Item 30 repeals subsection 108(6), which relates to the notice of revocation of an employer determination to the SSAT, when the Secretary revokes an employer determination, as a review would no longer occur in this situation (consequential to item 41).

                            Item 31 amends subsection 109(1) by adding the requirement for an employer to have an ABN, before the employer may choose to ‘opt in’ to pay instalments of parental leave pay to an employee.

                            Item 32 repeals and substitutes new paragraph 109(2)(b), which sets out the requirements of an election notice (or notice to ‘opt in’).

                            New paragraph 109(2)(b) provides that the election notice must be in the approved form and contain information (bank account information) about an account held and maintained by the employer into which PPL funding amounts can be paid.

                            Item 33 repeals items 10 and 11 in the table in section 146, relating to what constitutes a civil penalty provision.  This is consequential to items 21 and 23.

                            Item 34 repeals and substitutes new subsection 157(1), which relates to compliance notices given by the Secretary, to omit reference to failing to respond to an employer determination or failing to provide certain information after a review.  New subsection 157(1) provides that section 157 applies if the Secretary reasonably believes that a person has contravened subsection 82(2), which deals with an employer notifying the Secretary if certain events happen.

                            Item 35 amends subsection 159(1), and is consequential to item 36.

                            Item 36 repeals paragraphs 159(1)(b) and (c), relating to infringement notices the Secretary may give in relation to section 103 (which deals with responding to an employer determination) and subsection 105(3) (which deals with giving bank account and pay cycle information after a review).

                            Item 37 repeals and substitutes a new last paragraph of the Guide to Part 5-1 (relating to internal review of decisions) in section 202.  This change reflects the changes made by item 41.

                            Item 38 repeals the first note under subsection 203(2), which is consequential to the repeal of section 207 by item 41.

                            Item 39 changes the heading of ‘Note 2’ to ‘Note’ under subsection 203(2), which is consequential to item 38.

                            Item 40 amends subsection 205(1) by removing the reference to section ‘207’, which is consequential to item 41.

                            Item 41 repeals section 207, removing the right for an employer to make an application for internal review of an employer determination, as an employer can now simply decline the employer determination instead.

                            Item 42 amends subsection 209(2) by omitting the reference to ‘an application under section 207’.  This item is consequential to item 41.

                            Item 43 amends paragraphs 210(2)(a) and (b) by removing the references to ‘an employer determination decision’, which is consequential to item 41.

                            Item 44 repeals paragraph 212(1)(c), relating to a notice of a decision relating to an employer determination decision, which is consequential to item 41.

                            Item 45 amends subsection 212(5), and is consequential to item 44.

                            Item 46 amends paragraphs 223(1)(a), (b), (c) and (d) by omitting the references to ‘an employer determination decision’, which is consequential to item 41.

                            Item 47 repeals subsection 224(1), which allowed an employer to apply to the SSAT for review of an employer determination decision.  This item is consequential to the changes made by item 41.

                            Item 48 amends subsection 224(2) by omitting the reference to ‘if the decision is an employer funding amount decision’.

                            Item 49 amends subsection 224(3), and is consequential to item 47.

                            Item 50 repeals paragraph 225(2)(b), which is consequential to item 47.

                            Item 51 amends subsection 278(1), which relates to Commonwealth employees and is consequential to item 52.

                            Item 52 repeals subsection 278(2), which relates to Commonwealth employees and is consequential to item 17.

                            Item 53 repeals subsection 299(1) and substitutes a new subsection.

                            New subsection 299(1) provides that the PPL Rules or the regulations may provide that a person may make an election under section 109 to pay instalments to another person if both persons are in a relationship that is similar to the relationship between an employer and an employee.

Application and transitional provisions

                            Item 54 is an application provision, which provides that the amendments made by Part 1 of this Schedule apply in relation to an employer determination that is made on or after the commencement of this Schedule in relation to a claim for PLP that is made before, on or after that commencement.

                            Item 55 is a transitional provision relating to elections made before commencement.  This item provides that an election under section 109 of the Paid Parental Leave Act that is in force immediately before the commencement of this Schedule ceases to be in force at that commencement.

                            Item 56 is a transitional provision relating to revoking employer determinations made before commencement.

                            Subitem 56(1) provides that this item applies if:

       an employer determination was made before the commencement of this Schedule for a person and the person’s employer;

       the determination had not been revoked before that commencement; and

       the person’s PPL period had not started before that commencement.

                            Subitem 56(2) provides that the Secretary must revoke any determination captured under subitem 56(1).

1.70              Subitem 56(3) provides that the Paid Parental Leave Act applies as if a revocation under subitem 56(2) were made under subsection 108(1) of that Act.

Do not remove section break.


Policy objective

2.1                  A removal of the mandatory employer role under the Paid Parental Leave (PPL) scheme could assist in meeting the following objects:

       helping to reduce administration and compliance costs on employers , particularly those who feel the role is not beneficial for their organisation; and

       where the employer has administrative capacity and has found the role to be beneficial for their organisation, continue to provide an option for employers to take on this role voluntarily.

Implementation options

2.2                  In terms of assessing the regulatory impact, this statement reports on three options:

       Implementing the measure from 1 July 2014.

       Implementing the measure from 1 July 2015 as part of the broader reforms to the PPL scheme.

       Removing the employer role completely, with all payments under the PPL scheme to be made by the Department of Human Services (DHS).

Assessment of impacts

Implementing the measure from 1 July 2014

2.3                  This option would remove the PPL mandatory employer role from 1 July 2014, while still allowing employers to opt into providing payments under the PPL scheme to employees on voluntary basis, where both the employer and employee agree.

2.4                  For employers who consider the employer role to be an unnecessary burden, this option would provide an early removal of the mandatory nature of the current employer role.

2.5                  Proceeding with this option would also provide an opportunity to monitor employer involvement and any issues raised through an ‘opt‑in’ role well before commencement of the enhanced PPL scheme from 1 July 2015

Implementing the measure from 1 July 2015 as part of the broader reforms to the PPL scheme

2.6                  This option would implement the measure with a start date of 1 July 2015, in line with commencement of the broader reforms to the PPL scheme. 

2.7                  Delaying the start date of the measure to 1 July 2015 would allow time for further consultation with business community to occur before making any changes, which could have interactions with other private workplace arrangements.

2.8                  However, this delayed start date would not be beneficial for employers who no longer wish to play a role in administering parental leave pay (PLP) and incurring related costs.

Removing the employer role completely, with all payments under the PPL scheme to be made by DHS

2.9                  A complete removal of the employer role, either from 1 July 2014 or 1 July 2015, could also be considered.  Under this option, employers could no longer make any payments to employees, with all payments to be made by DHS.

2.10              Consultation with business community would need to occur before a change such as this could be implemented, as some businesses may have negotiated private workplace arrangements on the understanding that they would be the paymaster for their employees.

Impact group identification

Impact on employers

2.11              All three options would result in the same outcome: to shift administration costs from the employer to Government.

2.12              The evaluation Phase 2 report found the additional costs for employers were mainly due to the extra workload, rather than purchasing a new payroll system or hiring additional staff to administer the scheme:

2.13              Among the 29 per cent of employers who felt additional costs were involved, almost all (94 per cent) said these costs involved taking on extra workload themselves, while half (51 per cent) said the workload of current staff had been increased to implement PPL.

2.14              In terms of staff hours needed to implement PPL, the median identified by all organisations was 22 hours:

       4 per cent of organisations reported that no hours were needed.

       23 per cent of organisations reported 1-2 hours were needed.

       34 per cent reported implementation required 3-15 staff hours.

       30 per cent of all organisations reported the implementation of PPL took more than 15 staff hours.

       9 per cent of organisations reported that they did not know.

2.15              The median cost identified by all organisations to implement PPL was $1,783:

       Nearly half (45 per cent) of employers estimated the cost to be less than $250.

       21 per cent estimated the cost to be between $250-$1,000.

       20 per cent estimated the cost to exceed $1,000.

       14 per cent did not know the level of costs involved.

2.16              It is possible that smaller business would have larger proportional impact, as they do not have the same economies of scale when applying the process for a single employee.  As noted earlier, for 90 per cent of small businesses who provided PPL to an employee in 2012-13, this employee was the only PLP recipient in that business in the 2012-13 financial year.  Therefore, it is likely that for many small businesses, costs incurred to administer PLP payments are mostly one-off costs.

2.17              Forty one per cent of employers felt organising payments was time consuming and submissions to the review indicated that, even though costs may not have been significant, the process was viewed by some as time-consuming. 

2.18              Some employers find the administration of PPL problematic.  A very small number report very high monetary costs.  Evaluation interviews found some employers experienced problems, especially small, private organisations.

2.19              While there would be benefits to employers in the form of increased workforce attachment and overall participation, these are difficult to quantify.  As raised earlier, most employers are of the view that costs to administer the scheme outweigh any benefits that a mandatory employer role may deliver.  The evaluation results showed that most employers felt it was too soon to tell if there would be gains but most agreed that there had been good workplace attachment in women on parental leave.

2.20              The measure has no impact on regulatory or compliance costs for employees, as they would still undertake the same claim process as currently required.

Impact on employees

2.21              While most of the impact in removing the mandatory employer role would be felt by employers, there is an impact on employees with salary sacrifice arrangements in place.  Where their employer is administering the PLP payment, these salary sacrifice arrangements are able to continue and so the employee’s tax liability would continue to be calculated on a lower salary.  However, as DHS does not offer salary sacrifice deduction functionality, an employee’s tax liability could increase if the mandatory employer role is removed and their employer does not opt back in.  This may be a particular issue for employees in the not-for-profit sector.  This impact is not a compliance cost, but is an impact on the after-tax income a person may receive, dependent on an employee’s income and the level of salary sacrificed under the arrangement.

Impact on Government

2.22              As noted above, the measure would result in a shift of administration costs from employers to Government.  Currently DHS administer payments for around 24 per cent of employees (non-mandatory employees or recipients who do not have an employer), however under the measure they would be responsible for making the majority of payments to employees.  The additional cost to Government to implement the measure is $7 million over five years.

Analysis of costs/benefits

Average Annual Change in Compliance Costs (from BAU)

Sector/Cost Categories

Business

Not-for-profit

Individuals

Total by cost category

Administrative Costs

$44 million (savings)

$4 million

(savings)

$

$48 million (savings)

Substantive Compliance Costs

$

$

$

$

Delay Costs

$

$

$

$

Total by Sector

$44 million (savings)

$4 million

(savings)

$

$48 million (savings)

Proposal is deregulatory       Yes

Consultation

2.23              The opposition of employer groups to the mandatory employer role was first established during public consultations conducted in 2009, prior to implementation of the existing scheme.  An ongoing implementation working group which is made up of representatives from small business and large employer groups, employee, womens’ and community groups (which Government established to inform the PPL implementation process) has been specifically asked to comment on the mandatory employer role and has provided direct feedback indicating that it should be removed.

2.24              A public consultation process was undertaken as part of the PPL Review including:

       A public submission phase, including a general call for submissions and direct emails to employee, employer and community peak bodies.

       Face to face consultation with key stakeholders.

       The formation of a PPL Review steering committee made up of representatives from employer, employee, womens’ and community groups.

2.25              Feedback on the employer role has also been received through direct contact made by members of the public, generally small business employers who have been recently notified of their mandatory obligations.

2.26              The measure directly responds to all these forms of feedback received over a significant period of time.  As outlined earlier, employer groups have an overwhelming and sustained opposition to the mandatory employer role, and have put forward their own proposals to remove its mandatory nature.  While a specific implementation date for the removal of the mandatory nature of the employer role was not discussed with concerned employers, the feedback received was that this should occur as soon as practicable as a matter of priority.  The 1 July 2014 date is the earliest date on which the measure could proceed, due to administrative practicalities.  Employer groups did not raise any opposition to a continuing role should an employer voluntarily choose to do so.

2.27              Some representative bodies expressed support for the role (such as bodies representing employees and other interest groups). The view of these organisations is that having an employer administer the PLP payment reaffirms the nature of the payment as an industrial entitlement, rather than a welfare entitlement.  These groups particularly view the employer role to be beneficial in situations where employers ‘top-up’ PLP payments so that parents above minimum wage continue to be paid at their normal wage for a period, and so that parents continue to receive pay in line with their usual pay cycle. A small number of employers have also responded that they favour this approach.  The measure directly responds to this view by ensuring that employers who value the role can continue to have this arrangement with their employees (should the employee wish).

2.28              Further consultation with interested parties will occur in the lead up to commencement of the enhanced PPL scheme from 1 July 2015, to gauge the relevance of a continued opt-in employer role under the new scheme and whether any issues would need to be resolved to ensure effective arrangements from 1 July 2015.

Conclusion and recommended option

2.29              Given feedback from employers and the Government’s commitment to move to an ‘opt-in’ role, the preferred option could be to move to an opt-in employer role under the PPL scheme from either 1 July 2014 or 1 July 2015.  However, it is considered that an earlier start date of 1 July 2014 would be more beneficial for employers and provide a useful indicator of the effectiveness of the opt-in arrangements well before the commencement of the enhanced PPL scheme on 1 July 2015.

2.30              Under the measure to remove the mandatory employer role from 1 July 2014, all employers registered for the PPL scheme will be ‘opted out’ on that date and payments of parental leave pay will be made by DHS.  However, if an employer chooses to ‘opt in’ to provide the payment and the employee consents to being paid by their employer, an employer determination will be made and payment could be provided by the employer. Where an employer is already providing PLP to an employee on 1 July 2014, that arrangement would not be affected.

2.31              Ongoing, where an employee consents to being paid by their employer, employers will be sent a notice with the option to accept or decline an employer determination.  If the employer accepts the notice of the employer determination and their obligations to pay instalments of parental leave pay to the person, funds will be transferred to the employer in line with current arrangements.  If the employer declines or does not respond to the notice, DHS will provide parental leave pay directly to the customer.  To reflect the non-mandatory nature of their role, employers will no longer be potentially subject to a compliance notice for not responding to a notice of an employer determination.

2.32              The take up of the opt-in arrangement will be monitored as an indicator for the effectiveness of these arrangements as part of the enhanced PPL scheme to commence on 1 July 2015.  Key performance indicators could include:

       Number of employees who consent to their employer providing PLP.

       Number of employers who accept or decline the employer determination.

       Number of employers who opt-in after 1 July 2014.

Do not remove section break.


Prepared in accordance with Part 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011

Paid Parental Leave Amendment Bill 2014

3.1                  This Bill is compatible with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared in the international instruments listed in section 3 of the Human Rights (Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011.

Overview

3.2                  This Bill makes amendments to the employer role in the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010.  The amendments will remove the requirement for employers to provide Government-funded parental leave pay to their eligible long-term employees.  From 1 July 2014, employees will be paid directly by the Department of Human Services, unless an employer opts in to provide parental leave pay to its employees and an employee agrees for their employer to pay them.

Human rights implications

3.3                  The Paid Parental Leave scheme engages the right to social security in Article 9 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the right to work in Article 10 (2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

3.4                  However, the amendments in this Schedule are limited to changes to the administrative arrangements for delivering parental leave pay to customers.  They do not affect a customer’s eligibility to the payment, a customer’s rate of pay, or a customer’s entitlement to paid or unpaid leave from employment before and after the birth of a child.  As such, the amendments do not engage any human rights.

Conclusion

3.5                  This Bill is compatible with human rights as it does not raise any human rights issues.