Labour Review

What's New at the Organising Centre

Read the latest issue of Labour Review, Labor Council's resource for students and activists.

Labour Review,14 August 1999

Non-Standard Workers

What Impact has the Howard Government had on Wages and Hours of Work?

Non-Union Agreements

Pattern Bargaining: National v Site negotiations

Training

Federal Government Undermines Maternity Leave

Family Preferences, Child Care and Working Hours

Women's Earnings down to 66%

Unfair Dismissal for Contracts

Non-Standard Workers

Two recent conferences, one hosted by ACIRRT and the other by the Australian Industry Group, highlighted outsourcing, labour hire, teleworking, casualisation and dependent contractors, all under the umbrella of "non-standard" work.

Figures illustrating the changed workplace include

� 27% of the Australian workforce employed on a casual basis by 1998, and full time casual work expanding rapidly

� there are 1,002 labour hire companies operating in Australia

� 30 to 35% of employees had their wages regulated by individual contract in 1996.

The question of what is a genuine casual was discussed especially in the light of the full bench of the Federal Commission's decision in AMACSU v Auscript. The AIRC indicated that just because an employer calls someone a casual doesn't mean the commission will accept that. Rather they will look at the actual circumstances and if there is "an ongoing employment relationship" will be crucial to any decision.

Similarly with the issue of whether someone is an independent contractor or an employee. If a working relationship exists which is that of employer and employee, the parties cannot alter this by labelling themselves differently.

Labour hire and the legal implications of outsourcing was a big issue, with a focus on the increasingly common practice of transferring staff to a separate labour hire company and hiring back employees.

(Australian Enterprise Bargaining Update; newsletter 27, 25 June 1999)

What Impact has the Howard Government had on Wages and Hours of Work?

Howard and Reith claimed that no workers would be worse off under their industrial relations legislation. John Buchanan, Ron Callus and Chris Briggs make a preliminary assessment of that claim after two years of the Workplace Relations Act's operation.

Aggregate data would seem to bear out that claim. Looking more closely at disaggregated data on the four major types of wage determination (awards, collective agreements, individual contracts and contractors) shows that the phrase Barry Hughes used back in 1973 - the wages of the strong and the weak - captures today's realities.

In many ways the trends are part of the legacy of the ALP government's Industrial relations Reform Act 1993 with the Coaltion's legislation extending its ideas with the twist of actively seeking to demolish the power of unions altogether.

Workers relying on awards for increases depend on the safety net and in most industries the gap between the weak and the strong is growing.

The rise of self employed contractors has been a feature of the 1990s and due to the dependency of the contractors on certain employers they are also in a weak bargaining position.

The disappearing middle and the rise of the working poor has been a trend emphasised increasingly in recent years. NATSEM and researchers such as Bob Gregory have shown the importance of welfare transfer payments helping those at the bottom survive. With the cutbacks in social security and Third Way advocates such as Mark Latham (and now Noel Pearson) promoting self help and individual responsibility questions of equity and social justice seem to be bypassing the Coalition and New Labor. It is more important than ever that unions survive the onslaught and struggle to maintain a just and equitable society.

(Journal of Australian Political Economy; no. 43, June 1999)

Non-Union Agreements

Non-union collective agreements under s170LK of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 currently cover approximately 133,000 workers under 1200 such agreements registered with the AIRC. Mark Patterson from the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) claims 20% of all agreements have been made under this section of the Act. Unions are not necessarily excluded from the process but the ACCI and the federal government would of course prefer it that way. The Australian Guarantee Corporation and the Nike agreement are discussed here. The commission has made rulings in the Sebel Town House case and the above cases that limit the ability of unions to intervene.

(Australian Enterprise Bargaining Update; newsletter 27A, 2 August 1999)

Pattern Bargaining: National v Site negotiations

Orica, Hawker De Havilland, Pioneer and Shell are companies that have preferred to conduct centralised national bargaining, despite the Workplace relations Act's focus on enterprise or individual bargaining. Unions prefer this to ensure uniform outcomes. Carl Phillips from the AWU discusses the system here using Orica, Pivot Ltd and Email as examples.

(Australian Enterprise Bargaining Update; newsletter 27A, 2 August 1999)

Training

Betty Arsovska from ACIRRT presents a profile, based on ACIRRTs enterprise agreements database, of the way training clauses have been used in enterprise agreements. She looks at the frequency of training clauses and variation over a number of years of agreements, use by state and use by industry. Sample clauses in the airline industry and lighting production agreement are presented in full.

(Australian Enterprise Bargaining Update; newsletter 27A, 2 August 1999)

Federal Government Undermines Maternity Leave

Paid maternity has been stripped from employees of the corporatised Employment National (what's left of the CES) and workers at the Australian Government Solicitor face similar action. Entitlements were not transmitted when employees had to move to a new award in the corporatised Employment National. The recent decision by the Federal Court on entitlements of employees in the corporatised Victorian Health services would appear to undermine the federal government's approach.

At the same time, the Work and Family Unit of the Dept of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business has released Work and Family State of Play 1998 report extolling the virtues of companies who adopt family friendly practices.

Contrast this with the strong commitment of the NSW Government to strengthen family friendly policy, legislation and practice in NSW.

The private sector also has in some high profile instances (NRMA, Merrill Lynch, Westpac for example) been acting as a pacesetter in maternity and family friendly practices

(Discrimination Alert; issue 92, 3rd August 1999; Equal Opportunity Update; newsletter 105, 28 July 1999)

Family Preferences, Child Care and Working Hours

Julie Lee and Glenda Strachan challenge the rhetoric surrounding changes in work organisation which supposedly promote flexibility recognise work and family responsibilities. The evidence they gather points to the disparity between notions of flexibility held by employers and employees. Parental preferences with respect to child care and changes in hours arrangements (longer hours, greater spread of normal hours, increased weekend work) illustrate this disparity. If one party to such arrangements refuses to acknowledge and amend work practices then chances for change are slim. With a government encouraging such practices (as in NSW) improvements are possible. With a federal government giving more power to employers improvement is unlikely.

(Journal of Australian Political Economy; no. 43, June 1999)

Women's Earnings down to 66%

Sex Discrimination Commissioner Sue Halliday told the Women, Management and Industrial relations Conference that whilst women's average weekly earnings (full time) are 83.6% of men's the true picture (which includes over-award and overtime payments) showed that this figure drops to 79%. Given that many women were in part-time and casual jobs, the figure drops again to 66% when they are taken into account.

(Discrimination Alert; issue 92, 3rd August 1999)

Unfair Dismissal for Contracts

A case involving the termination of the contract of the Australian national table tennis coach has indicated that an employee on a fixed term contract is not necessarily barred from claiming unfair dismissal.

The Workplace Relations Act states that employees engaged under a contract for a particular period of time are excluded from unfair dismissal claims and this is what Table Tennis Australia relied upon in climing it was safe from such a claim in dismissing the coach. The AIRC found that the contract did not run for a specified time, despite the wording of the contract and its decision indicates that employers can't terminate an employee during the life of a contract and still insist that a contract is for a fixed term.

(Employee Relations Update; vol. 6, no. 128, 9th August 1999

  View entire issue - print all of the articles!

  Issue 26 contents

»	Workers to Star in Second Wave Rally
»	Oakdale Injustice: Six Weeks Is All It Takes
»	Chook War Widens - Woman Who Walked Wants Job Back
»	Rural Council Workers Push to Quit ALP
»	Push for Action on Millennium Leave Bug
»	Pay Equity Inquiry Sidelined
»	NRMA Candidates Address Union Concerns
»	Ceiling Dust a Deadly Cocktail
»	Sex Discrimination Head Warns Against Complacency
»	DIR Launches Indigenous Employment Unit
»	"Big Drum Up" For East Timor
»	Eric Lee Public Forum
»	STOP PRESS: Fire Bans Lifted But Dispute Not Over

»	Guest Report
»	Sport
»	Trades Hall
»	Piers Watch

»	Piers Fans Fires
»	Some Views Of Einstein
»	Group Homes Sell-Off Fears
»	Privatisation Of Prince Of Wales Hospital Maintenance Department
»	Call for Wage Freeze Action

Notice Board
- Check out the latest events

Latest Issue

View entire latest issue
- print all of the articles!

Previous Issues

Subject index

Search all issues

© 1999-2000 Labor Council of NSW

LaborNET is a resource for the labour movement provided by the Labor Council of NSW

[ Privacy Statement | Disclaimer | Credits ]

LaborNET is proudly created, designed and programmed by Social Change Online for the Labor Council of NSW