The Opposition is slowly adding detail to its industrial relations policy. Despite John Howard’s long-standing belief in radical reform, it is becoming more like a me-too policy with each detail. On Thursday the Opposition spokesman on industrial relations, Peter Reith, announced the Opposition would have a “”no disadvantage” test when awards are converted to enterprise awards, just like the Government. However, it appears that though the name is the same, they mean different things. The Government’s “”no-disadvantage” means the overall package for each worker will be at least as good after the first enterprise-bargain award as before it. The Opposition’s “”no disadvantage” means that a set of basic conditions will be set down which cannot be “”bargained” away … such as basic pay, holidays and parental leave.
The Opposition is picking a path between much needed-economic reform and not frightening the large number of voters who are subject to awards. The label “”no disadvantage” is at least superficially attractive to voters, but a more accurate description would be “”safety net”.
The Government is equally guilty of mis-labelling. It is nonsense to call the present system enterprise bargaining. The process almost always involves union officials who do not work at the enterprise negotiating the bargain. These officials are usually looking at the effect the bargain might have on other members outside the enterprise. Coupled with the no-disadvantage rule, little has changed. Many new enterprise bargains carry all the stiflingly detailed clauses about allowances, hours, special rates and the like that made the previous system so cumbersome.
Continue reading “1995_09_september_leader16sep”