Domestic violence leave should be funded by government or the current leave provisions should be used.
Domestic Violence is a private issue in many ways and now the management of it has become a public issue through demands for Domestic Violence Leave (DVL).
Domestic violence is a problem that must be addressed and eradicated. Any structured response needs to be from the broader society, pills not from individual employers who may also be victims.
The solution is not to have DVL in the workplace relations system; except where a company volunteers to do so, tadalafil as many big businesses and government agencies are doing through their enterprise agreements.
Instead we should have a nationally provided system of DVL the same as we have for Paid Parental Leave (PPL). This reflects the fact that we face a societal issue, find not a problem that is created by employers.
This proposal also gives victims the option of maintaining privacy for a situation that many do not wish to share with those in the workplace, no matter how well meaning and supportive those people are and can be.
This includes employers and work colleagues but also includes friends and relatives. Domestic violence is difficult and many want privacy, not further complication.
COSBOA is proposing that the DVL system be managed by the experts in the field, the Domestic Violence Safer Pathway is the obvious choice for their expertise and professionalism. There are many other agencies that provide expert support. This takes the onus away from individual employers who will not have the expertise to deal with this and indeed may be victims themselves. This also gives the victim potential access to leave without having to disclose to the employer the reason.
Individual employers have been shown to be already very supportive and along with co-workers will do whatever is possible to assist. This includes providing time off, often paid for by the employer, and the employees contribute by working extra hard as a result and do so without rancor or complaint. Why institutionalise good deeds? There seems to be very few or no cases of the opposite occurring.
There is no doubt that a scheme funded by employers fails any test of fairness when the needs of the self-employed are considered. An employer, a woman or a man, could be a victim yet this is not acknowledged and worryingly these victims, who are employers, will be forced to find extra funds and extra time to manage the lives of others who are fellow victims.
There could also be an extra demand placed on employers in areas where there is a higher incidence of domestic violence. This could fall on some employers more unfairly than it does on others, which reflects the very issues around Domestic Violence.
There is also a school of thought that a more productive workplace is one where the employer cares for employees. That is obvious, but the problem becomes when that statement is extended to situations such as PPL and DVL. Asking a small business person to find extra cash or extra time to manage a government-imposed process or expense does not create productivity. It does the opposite as the employer and her or his family is stressed. The employer is asked to spend less time on running their business, less time with their own families and less money on their own necessities because some academics say so. (These academics normally only study big businesses and often dance to the beat of big unions). Common sense should always apply ahead of false academic thesis.
We should not create greater complexity and more victims from domestic violence. That makes the problem worse not better. This approach has the potential to embed the behaviour as something to be dealt with not something that needs to be stopped.
The best solution is to fund this through government and have it managed by the welfare sector. Then there is a greater chance of getting victims to go where there is privacy and professional support and will help keep their job and others jobs more secure.