Bosses oppose leave for IVF treatment, vasectomy recovery

Employer say time off for workers to deal with reproductive health issues can be addressed through existing leave entitlements.

Opposition employment spokesman Michaelia Cash says unions are “flexing their muscles”.

Business groups are opposing the union push for 10 days reproductive and preventive health leave a year, claiming time off for IVF treatment, vasectomy recovery and prostate or breast cancer screening can be accommodated through existing leave entitlements.

Unions in Queensland have held “positive” talks with the state government about applying reproductive leave across the public sector and will seek the support of the ACTU Congress in June for unions to campaign nationally to have the leave entitlements inserted into the National Employment Standards.

Building on its earlier push for menstrual and menopause leave, the Queensland Council of Unions said the reproductive leave entitlement would include additional paid leave required for workers to take time off for IVF treatment.

It also includes a component of preventive health leave for workers dealing with vasectomies, hysterectomies, end of pregnancies and breast, cervical and prostate screening.

The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said the matters were appropriately dealt with through existing entitlements to personal leave.

“Employees are entitled to 10 days of personal leave under the National Employment Standards,” an ACCI spokesman said.

“There does not need to be a new form of leave for every circumstance that may arise in the private life of an employee.

Australian Industry Group head of workplace relations policy, Brent Ferguson, said “in many instances, employees were already able to access significant entitlements provided under current workplace laws to help them deal with the kinds of significant issues identified by the unions’.

Mr Ferguson said there were many very important reasons why employees sought or needed to be absent from leave beyond those identified by the union, including other medical reasons.

“While employers are commonly willing to provide various types of flexibilities to help employees navigate these issues when they can, it wouldn’t be reasonable to simplistically impose an additional paid leave obligation on all employers on top of the existing substantial safety net.” he said.

“A more balanced and nuanced approach is required”.

Asked whether the federal government would consider inserting reproductive health provisions into the National Employment Standards, a spokesman for Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke said “the significant industrial relations changes that we had planned for this term are now law”.

“Different claims will be made in enterprise agreement negotiations and they’ll be settled between workers and employers,” he said.

Opposition employment spokesman Michaelia Cash said there were already adequate leave provisions in the National Employment Standards “which could be utilised for such matters”. “The unions appear to be flexing their muscles by looking for more ways to add cost and complexity to businesses,” Senator Cash said.

“Many small businesses are unlikely to be able to absorb the added leave liabilities especially during a cost of doing business crisis.”

QCU secretary Jacqueline King said unions wanted the Queensland government to initially announce paid reproductive leave as a policy for the state public sector before making a commitment at the state election this year to insert it into state employment standards and extend it to local government in 2025.

If that occurred, unions would “use that as leverage to get the ball rolling nationally”. Ms King said she expected the ACTU Congress in June to back a national approach.

An ACTU spokesman said the ACTU Congress was “where policy positions are democratically discussed and positions are taken - we look forward to debating this policy in June”.