Australian Employment Relations - Literature review Example

Name: Institution: Title: Australian Employment Relations Professor: Course: Date Due Introduction In the recent days Australia has witnessed great changes in the employment industrial relation system. Many of these changes are revealed to have been inventive but means in which the ideas have been introduced varies considerably (Conley, 2002, pp. 34). The terms used for instance high commitment, high involvement or high performance; are part of the systems terms that have continually been used in employee relations. These terms have been imperative in identifying new approaches by many management systems that emphasize the importance of employee level of quality and productivity. There are survey reports indicating that employees in Australian industrial system feel they are not involved in any discussion of workplace key issues; an element that affect them at work (Latham, 1998, pp. 27). There are cases revealing that employees feel they are often overworked, highly stressed with cases of little or no security. This report seeks to analyze various forms of inequalities at workplace, while revealing institutional mechanism required in fostering sustainable workplace innovation. Concern is put on Australian rising inequality to be a case of unavoidable by-product of liberalism and globalization, considering the Australian government efforts to reduce inequality among its society, in a case where trust is directed broadly on economic open-mindedness. Pierson (2001, pp.53) in his work argues that there is increasing controversy concerning measurement of inequality and poverty issues in Australia. For instance, the government has adversely directed its efforts on increasing outward orientation on aspects of economies, a move that undoubtedly focused on achieving low inflation rates in the country. Pierson further reveals that employment conditions and working conditions are particularly major issues raising concern across all industries in the country. This is in relation to employment inequality. This is done considering its conditions to populations and defines the concept. Both employment and working conditions are different yet to certain aspects are interrelated concepts. Often most employment contracts are not subjected to any formal contract with a high proportion of the total employment in Australia lying in the informal economy. Since employment relation vary in nature both within the formal and the informal sector, an analysis done by Edwards (2001, pp.34) reveals that increasing inequality is not to blame in a case poor people as a result of economic forces that has made well-off population within the Australian societies richer. Other writers such as Taines argue that the Australian raising inequality should not be looked at as a problem for policy makers but rather more of a policy lesson that has to be encouraged in reinstating effective measures to eradicate the widening income inequality among its society. Policy makers among other authorities within the Australian society have in the past been involved in persuading Australian people into accepting that they are part of the economy (Whitehouse, 2001, pp.44). This well elaborated context indicates an agreed embrace of the whole range of new realities (Taines, 2001, pp. 12). This can be pointed out well through embracing trade liberalizing concepts in the Australian economy. The results of this have been tremendous. More specifically, the Australian economy has since improved over a decade. It has been done considering equity of opportunity and treatment, remuneration and citizen’s access to safety and health as well as equity in association to collaborative employee bargaining. Imperative still is the balance between men and women at work and at home granting all workers a fair situation without considering gender difference (Pierson, 2001, pp. 78). According to Whitehouse (2001, pp. 23), there are specified anti-discrimination laws, exclusion sexual among other forms of inequity within the industrial relation (IR) regulatory laws. The equity among working population is also guided through human resource management approaches in applying affirmative actions. During the early 1990s, the Australian labor government revealed an increasing trend on matters of income inequality and was considered to be a global development. The labor government argues that it was much involved in restructuring the worst effects in a structured change. This is in relation to a gap between the rich and the poor in addition to employment inequalities. There are effects driven by conventions in Australia, for instance agencies, in particular the international labor organization is reported to have had a major effect on advocating for sex equality within the Australia’s employment and IR (Charlesworth, 2007, pp.47). Considering Strachan (2000, pp. 17) sentiments on aspects of inequality, Strachan is convinced that the Australian government has acted swiftly towards eradicating all aspects of employment inequality: for instance, the ratification of the sex discriminatory act established in 1984. According to his argument, reinforcement act was focused on adding more formal concept in handling issues of gender equity at workplace. This can be explained in the law advocacy measures directed towards employment equal opportunity especially for women; considering terms of less favorable employment treatment where both women and men are placed under similar circumstances. Charlesworth, (2007, pp, 41), argues that the IR operations and regulation aspects has over the years been acted upon in a gender insensitive manner, and rather instilled with traditional male wage earner assumptions. Contrary to this, there exists a rich element of experiential studies on the gender disparity influence drawn by the IR regulation on pay inequity and collapse of the federal IR regulation in addressing issues of employee pay bias based on gender. Smith (2007, pp. 17) bases heavily on the Australia’s polarized gender working regime that is inclined on gender equity. The IR regulation does not fully regulate formal arrangement to be achieved through its mechanisms. The IR system is often accused of being reluctant to stand in support of increased bargaining enforced by women as a way of fighting for poor working conditions for women. Changes made in the IR regulatory system has recently prompted more analysis on gender impact on employment and IR endeavor bargaining as well as personalized workplace contracts on far-reaching changes made available through work choices contracts Strachan (2000, pp. 63). However, the IR regulation lacks the balance between realities where most women live and the ideal regulation policy in identifying the real worker. Less attention has been prearranged and enforced to cab the increasingly persistent employment gender bias. According to Preston (2007, pp. 32), Australian HRM systems in general strives to eliminate employment inequality. This has been evident as most organizations’ HRM systems have continually adopted equal employment opportunity concepts into their operation. Women in particular being the main beneficiaries of these regulatory laws, EEO laws seek to improve equal opportunities by use of voluntary actions driven from employers as demanded by the Australian government among other authorities in the country. The HRM approach particularly for the last ten years has embraced EEO regulations substituting IR regulations. This has been adopted into the Australian law enforcement authority. For instance, employers with workforce exceeding 100, there is a law intended to encourage action at the enterprise level. Typical examples can be derived from completion of affirmative action act of 1996 (AAA) followed by the equal opportunity for women in their workplace act developed in 1999 (EOWWA). Despite all this, employment inequality continually grows. Perhaps this can be explained with liberalization of the Australian enterprises driven by market pressure rather than government and labor regulatory framework requirements (Charlesworth, 2007, pp. 57). The Australian issues of employment relation are done considering economic, social and political aspects. For instance, economical indifferences are based on whether the population employment elements concern active and inactive individuals within the society (Preston, 2007, pp. 23). This possible group is achieved by dividing the unemployed and the employed among the Australian society. Again the employed are further differentiated according to status based on whether they are self-employed or employees of other organizations. Similarly, part-time and full-time employment is imperative. Following this, the Australian bureau of statistics reveals that though the economy has improved over the years, the number of unemployment is increasing; this has to deal with issues of capitalism acts adopted in the government policies. However, aspects of globalization are arguably seen to have been the force behind the rising inequality in Australia (Smith, 2007, pp.44). Conclusion The argument on employment inequality to many policy-makers, employers and analysts in the recent years is viewed to be an issue that can be widely associated to increased acceptance of economic liberalization concepts and globalised societies. Certain individuals fail on market terms. Often societies operating under these circumstances have less or no concerns on equity (Smith, 2007, pp.42). This kind of situation in the regulatory framework and other government regulatory bodies can only work towards fostering increased self-reliance. The report argues in a sense that issues of employment inequality do not necessarily base on regulatory bodies or policy makers’ ideas but rather how these concepts are implemented. Annotated Bibliography List 1. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2001). Income Distribution 1999-2000 (Cat. No. 6523.0). Victoria: Australian Bureau of Statistics. This is an information source on data and trend across all aspects of social, economic and political information on Australia. The information given by Australian Bureau of Statistics reveals issues of income and inequality among Australain population. The facts given here isolate specific issues of inequality among the Australian society and it is based on active and inactive measures of revelaing issues of employment inequality. 2. Smith, B. (2007). ‘From Wardley to Purvis - How Far has Australian Anti-Discrimination Law Come in 30 Years? Australian Journal of Labour Law , vol. 21. The author of this journal highlights inequality issues. In the article more focus is driven towards employment discrimination. The article discuses issues of gender segregation on aspects of employment particularly on wage, remuneration of women compared to their male counterparts. In this article there are clear measures suggested that concerns issues of employer discrimination against women employees. Anti-discriminatory laws for example the EEO laws are well elaborated under this article. 3. Edwards, p. (2001). The employment relationship and the field of industrial relations. Industral Relations , pp. 2-33. This is an employment journal review. All aspects of industrial relation in Australia are discussed. This suggests possible inequality as observed under the employment and industrial relation. The suggested IR regulatory framework is put in place to create sanity on all aspects of employment. The journal gives a clear structure on all issues of employment discrimination among other unlawful acts practiced. This considers both cases of informal and formal settings. 4. Pierson, C. (2001). Globalisation and the End of Social Democracy. Australian Journal of Politics and History , 47(4). Pierson in this article argues that aspects of inequalities take a diverted attention depending on the identified country. Issues of liberalization and increased globalization are viewed to be among issues driving inequality on aspects of employment. Bibliography Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2001). Income Distribution 1999-2000 (Cat. No. 6523.0). Victoria: Australian Bureau of Statistics. Borland, J. (n.d.). Earnings Inequality in Australai: Changes, causes and consequences. Economic record , Vol. 75(229) pp. 177-202. Charlesworth, S. (2007). The Intersections of Gender Equality and Decent Work: Progress and Prospects in Australia. Journal of Industrial Relations . Conley, T. (2002). Globalisation as Constraint and Opportunity: The Restructuring of the Australian Political Economy. Global Society , 16 (4). Edwards, p. (2001). The employment relationship and the field of industrial relations. Industral Relations , pp. 2-33. Kelly, P. (1994). The End of Certainty: Power, Politics and Business in Australia, 2nd Edition. Sydney,: Allen & Unwin. Latham, M. (1998). Civilising Global Capitalism: New Thinking for Australian Labor. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Pierson, C. (2001). Globalisation and the End of Social Democracy. Australian Journal of Politics and History , 47(4). Preston, A. a. (2007). Trends in Australia’s Gender Wage Ratio. Journal of Labour and Industry , Vol.18 (2). Smith, B. (2007). ‘From Wardley to Purvis - How Far has Australian Anti-Discrimination Law Come in 30 Years? Australian Journal of Labour Law , vol. 21. Strachan, G. a. (2000). W(h)ither Affirmative Action Legislation in Australia? Journal of Interdisciplinary Gender Studies , 5(4) 46. Taines, C. (2001). Work rich, work poor:Inequality and ecomomic change in Australia. Whitehouse, G. (2001). Recent Trends in Pay Equity: Beyond the Aggregate Statistics. Journal of Industrial Relations , 43 (1), 66-78. Read More