Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. HereÔŅĹs how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Employers want to undermine workers' basic rights

By Jeff Lawrence - posted Wednesday, 16 September 2009


The hysterical response from several business lobby groups to the modernising of awards raises questions about whether employers are being honest about what they really want.

Ever since the introduction of enterprise bargaining under the Keating government, employers have sought a single industrial relations system and have claimed that the operation of multiple awards across multiple states was costly and inefficient for large businesses.

The Howard government - through the WorkChoices IR laws - provided an unfair and ultimately unsound basis for that national system.

Advertisement

Responding to employer demands, the Howard government also committed to rationalising and updating the award system (the “award rationalisation” process) but never completed the job, deciding that it was too hard.

The Rudd Labor government, as a part of its election commitments, undertook to do what the Coalition couldn’t or wouldn’t - retain and modernise the award system.

This has involved reducing more than 2,600 awards to about 130. It includes developing a single award standard within each industry (such as manufacturing or retail) or major occupation (such as nursing) that removes state-based differences in awards in national industries. In most cases this will result in employers only having to refer to one award for their business and not the multitude they have needed to refer to in the past.

Now we are well on the way to achieving the rationalisation of awards within a single national industrial relations system, employers are complaining that the new awards might impose some additional costs upon them.

It is notable that they have never complained of the savings many will get through the new modern awards or any of the adverse effects of the new awards on their employees.

Employers have also complained that they need at least five years to phase in the new awards. The Industrial Relations Commission this week gave employers a five-year period to phase in any increases in wages starting from July 1, 2010.

Advertisement

But employers still aren’t happy.

Which begs the question - what do they really want?

What is becoming clear is that many employers actually don’t want a modern award system - they want no awards at all.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

An edited version of this article was first published in The Australian on September 8, 2009.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

31 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Jeff Lawrence is Secretary of the ACTU.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 31 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy