The Official Organ of LaborNET
click here to view the latest edition of Workers Online
The Official Organ of LaborNET
Free home delivery
June 2005   

Interview: The Baby Drought
Social ethicist Leslie Cannold has delved into why women - and men - are having fewer children. And it all comes back to the workplace.

Industrial: Lies, AWAs and Statistics
David Peetz uncovers the truth behind the latest statistics on earnings under Australian Workplace Agreements.

Workplace: The Invisible Parents
Current government policies about work and family do not reflect the realities of either family life or the modern workplace. writes Don Edgar.

History: Bruce’s Big Blunder
The Big Fella, Jack Lang, gives an eyewitness account of the last time Conservatives tried to dismantle Australia’s industrial relations system.

Politics: All God's Children
The battle for morality is not confined to Australian polittics. Michael Walzer writes on the American perspective

Economics: Spun Out
The business groups are feeling cocky. The feds have announced their IR changes, business says they don't go far enough. What a surprise, writes Neale Towart

International: Shakey Trials
Lyndy McIntyre argues the New Zealnd IR experiment provides warnings - and hope - for the Australian union movement.

Legal: Civil Distrubance
Tom Roberts argues that there is more at stake than an attack on building workers in the looming legsilation.

Review: Crash Course In Racism
Paul Haggis flick Crash suggests that when cars collide the extent of people's prejudices are revealed sans the usual veil of political correctness, writes Tara de Boehmler.

Poetry: You're Fired
New laws will leave bosses holding the whip and workers with a Raw Hide, writes resident bard David Peetz


The Locker Room
Ashes to Dust
In which Phil Doyle travels to distant lands in search of a meat pie, and prepares for the joys of sleep deprivation

The Westie Wing
Ian West lists the Top Ten reasons why workers in NSW can gain some solace from having the Labor Party sitting on the Treasury benches…

The Soapbox
Dear John
In response to this year’s Federal Budget, Bishop Kevin Manning wrote an open letter to the Prime Minister, Mr John Howard


An Act of Faith
After a week of watching the Howard Government attempt to explain their vision of work relations we have a clearer picture of what the social safety net will be in the future – an act of faith


 Beattie Dares Job Vandals

 Broken Hill Confronts "Choice"

 BHP Faces Losses

 Howard Threatens Babies

 Working Between the Flags

 Hadgkiss Makes History

 Bob The Organiser

 Johnny Packs Toothbrush

 Security Blunders to the Max

 EDI Court Out

 Feds: Do As I Say …

 Soaring Mercury Sparks Walk Off

 Unions Offer to Play Libs

 Education Stands Up To Howard Assault

 Dodgy Bosses Get a Tick

 Weight Watchers Raise Scales

 Hyundai Showdown a Riot

 Activists' What's On!

 Patriot Doug
 Remembering Workers In Cairns
 Bad Law
 Fair Go For Injured Workers
 A Question Of Choice
 Galahs Up The Cross
 National Solution
 Bomber’s Classic
About Workers Online
Latest Issue
Print Latest Issue
Previous Issues
Advanced Search

other LaborNET sites

Labor Council of NSW
Vic Trades Hall Council
IT Workers Alliance
Unions on LaborNET
Evatt Foundation

Labor for Refugees



Lies, AWAs and Statistics

David Peetz uncovers the truth behind the latest statistics on earnings under Australian Workplace Agreements.

Last year you probably heard a lot of the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Kevin Andrews, talking about the much higher wages workers on Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) were receiving. He was fond of saying "Workers on AWAs earn on average 29 per cent more than their colleagues on collective agreements. Female workers on AWAs earn 32 per cent more" (emphasis added by the Minister).

The Australian Bureau of Statistics released the latest figures on earnings of workers on AWAs and collective agreements six weeks ago, but I didn't see a press release from the Minister's office at the time. What did they show?

In May 2004, non-managerial workers on registered individual contracts received an average of $23.40 per hour, which was 2 per cent less than workers on registered collective agreements ($23.90 per hour). As 99 per cent of workers on registered individual contracts were on AWAs in 2004 (the state systems of individual contracting having virtually withered away), we can say that AWAs paid about 2 per cent less than registered collective agreements..

For men, the difference between earnings under the two systems was not significant, but women on AWAs had hourly earnings some 11 per cent less than women on registered collective agreements. This was a pretty noteworthy figure, considering the Minister's earlier claim that women earned 32 per cent more on AWAs than on collective agreements.

The gender pay gap was worse on AWAs: whereas women on registered collective agreements received 90 per cent of the hourly pay of men on such agreements, women on AWAs received only 80 per cent of the hourly pay of men on AWAs.

For casual workers, AWAs paid 15 per cent less that registered collective agreements. For permanent part-time workers AWAs paid 25 per cent less. Indeed, amongst permanent part-time employees even "award only" workers (those who received exactly the award rate) were earning an average of 8 per cent more than AWA workers.

For female permanent full-time workers, AWAs paid 7 per cent less than collective agreements. Only for male permanent full-time workers did AWAs have higher average hourly earnings than registered collective agreements (by just 4 per cent), and the number is quite small considering several things that push up the apparent relative pay of AWA workers. For example, AWA workers are disproportionately represented in the high-wage mining industry, while the AWA statistics are slightly bloated by the inclusion in them of a handful of high-paying state-registered individual contracts. In addition, the average earnings of workers on registered collective agreements are dragged down by the fact that a small minority are on "section 170LK" non-union enterprise agreements, which have consistently had lower wage increases than union enterprise agreements. Moreover, the earnings of people covered by collective agreements are held back by the large numbers of free riders - non-members who enjoy the benefits of collective agreements without paying any of the costs of union membership - who depress the bargaining power of workers engaged in collective bargaining.


When the advocates of individual contracting cite higher wages from AWAs than from collective agreements, they are careful to choose the figure that is most favourable to individual contracting - but which is also the least valid comparison of like with like. For example, they will typically use weekly rather than hourly earnings (because AWA employees work 6 per cent more hours, though they have an hourly rate of pay 2 per cent lower, the total weekly earnings of AWA employees are 4 per cent more than workers on registered collective agreements) and include managerial employees (which makes AWA employees appear to receive 12 per cent more per week than workers on registered collective agreements).

This is what Minister Andrews was doing last year, using weekly wages that included high-paid managers in the figures. But even that seems to be something he doesn't do much now. Why? Here's one of his quotes, from June last year (using ABS data from 2002):

"The facts on AWAs speak for themselves. AWAs provide superior wages and conditions for staff compared to federal awards and collective agreements. Average weekly wages for workers covered by AWAs are $1001.10. This compares to $741.30 for workers under collective agreements." (Again, he added the emphasis in bold.)

What do the figures show now? Average weekly wages for workers covered by AWAs in 2004 were $890.80. That's $110 or 11 per cent less than in 2002.

This compares to $787.40 for workers under collective agreements. That's $46 or 6.2 per cent more than in 2002 for workers on collective agreements.

What mainly happened is that the figures that were being cited by Minister Andrews last year excluded many of the low-wage individual contracts were in the Western Australian state jurisdiction in 2002. By 2004, most of those employees were covered by AWAs. (The remainder would mostly have been covered by s170LK non-union enterprise agreements.) The exclusion of Western Australian agreements from the 2002 figures meant that that year's AWA figures exaggerated the incomes of people on individual contracts. Their inclusion at last in the AWA statistics means that the numbers now give a clearer indication of what individual contracts mean for workers' wages.

As Minister Andrews said, the facts on AWAs speak for themselves.

David Peetz is professor of industrial relations at Griffith University and a visiting professor at the University of Bergen, Norway.


email workers to a friend printer-friendly version latest breaking news from labornet

Search All Issues | Latest Issue | Previous Issues | Print Latest Issue

© 1999-2002 Workers Online
Workers Online is a resource for the Labour movement
provided by the Labor Council of NSW
Last Modified: 15 Nov 2005

Powered by APT Solutions
Labor Council of NSW Workers Online