Federal Labor rejects AWAs
By Maree O’Halloran
Federal Labor leader Kim Beazley announced on June 11 that a Labor government would scrap Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs). Voters now have a clear choice between the Federal Government's radical and extreme industrial laws and Labor's support for collective bargaining and union representation.
An immediate and coordinated cacophony of big business squealing and right wing commentator blustering followed Mr Beazley's announcement. Such cacophony demonstrates that Labor is offering a real choice to voters which threatens the Coalition's hold on government.
Under Federal Labor the only form of individual contracts legally allowed would be common law agreements. Such agreements sit on top of awards and collective agreements. Hence all award/agreement conditions must be met. The common law agreement can only provide additional, "above award" entitlements.
Common law agreements are not new. They have existed side by side with awards, and conciliation and arbitration through the history of modern, statute-based, industrial laws.
Kim Beazley's announcement appears to have been triggered by the notorious Spotlight AWAs which abolish many award conditions including shiftwork loadings and penalty rates for a two cent per hour increase.
Employers cut into awards
The Federal Government's industrial laws have already enabled some employers to bite into awards savagely. The Federal Employment Advocate, Peter McIlwain, sampled 250 of the 6236 AWAs lodged in the first month of operation of the new industrial laws. The survey found a dramatic contraction in the range of conditions that many employers are starting to offer. For example:
- 100 per cent excluded at lease one award condition
- 16 per cent excluded all award conditions
- 64 per cent removed leave loading
- 63 per cent removed penalty rates
- 52 per cent removed shiftwork loading
2006 OECD Employment Outlook
The recently released 2006 OECD Employment Outlook undermines the economic case that Prime Minister John Howard and his ministers have been using to defend their industrial laws. John Howard has not been able to guarantee that no worker will be worse off under the laws because that is clearly and obviously untrue. Instead, Mr Howard argues that the "aggregate impact is going to be beneficial" (Sunday, June 18). In other words, lower wages and reduced job security for some workers will boost employment participation and productivity.
However, the OECD report fundamentally undermines this view. According to the report:
- Coordinated wage bargaining at the enterprise level "is found to significantly reduce unemployment".
- "No significant direct impact of the level of the minimum wage on unemployment is identified" and that having a "minimum wage could encourage higher participation, by helping to make work pay for the low skilled [they would be attracted to working rather than accepting welfare]".
- "The impact of Employment Protection Laws (EPL) and union density on unemployment are statistically insignificant."
ACTU/Unions NSW campaign
The Opposition Leader's announcement on AWAs is testament to the strength of the union movement's campaign to date.
The National Week of Action begins today (Monday June 26). Federation advertised in metropolitan and regional newspapers in the lead up to the Week of Action and will continue to do so this week.
On Wednesday June 28, protest rallies have been organised in Blacktown in Sydney and some regional centres. It is important that Federation and the broader union movement maximise attendance at the rallies. Such protests are the visible face of unions campaigning. They give hope to vulnerable workers and remind all political parties that the unions will keep fighting.
State public sector workers
Teachers in the public education system are not exposed to the Federal Government's laws. The State Labor Government is opposed to the federal laws. State Coalition Leader Peter Debnam said on Stateline on June 16 that a future State Coalition Government would refer NSW industrial powers to the Commonwealth except for state government employees. That promise is about neutralising industrial relations as a factor in the March 2007 state election.
In the short term, teachers are protected. However, if the Federal Government is re-elected at the next federal election, and its industrial laws become entrenched, then it seems inevitable that all employees will eventually be caught up in the new system. It simply won't be tenable for state governments to maintain separate systems only for state government employees.
Federation would like to thank members for their work and contribution to the industrial relations campaigns. Our students, our families and our communities are already feeling the effects of the Federal Government's radical industrial laws.
Maree O'Halloran is the President.
but backpedals on school funding
Final details for workers' rights allies on Wednesday
Angry teachers dump careless Spotlight
Shame file
Community joins in campaign event
For further information
June 2006 contents
|
Subscribe
