Employment Relations in Australia and China - Essay Example

Essay Context: The past two decades have seen a transformation, in most countries, from a traditional Industrial Relations system to a contemporary Employment Relations one Student’s Name: Course Code: Date of Submission: Introduction Employment relations engage with what actually takes place in the workplace as far as the relationship between employees and employers is concerned. It deals with how the interactions between employees and employers should be managed. It is deals with the distribution of power between employer and employees, the incidence and expression of conflict and the social and legislation framework which regulates employment relationships. On the other hand, industrial relations, a term equivalent to employment relations in the past, is concerned with the regulation of the interactions between trade unions and the employer and is characterised with employees agitating for their rights in a collective manner, discussion and sometimes standoffs (Dundon and Rollinson, 2007). The adoption of the term employment relations rather than the continued use of industrial relations is due to a wide range of changes and improvements in governance, economy, social and legislation context of the employment relationships in the last two decades. Some of those developments include new forms of human resource management, changing of the economy to be more of a service provision economy, less powerful and less influential trade unions, reduced support of trade unions by the government, greater individualisation and flexible tools of managing human resources all of which have empowered the employee affording him or her some ‘voice’ and autonomy in the workplace (Dundon and Gollan, 2007). This essay will explore such changes and developments in Australia and China. It is true that there have been changes in most countries which have seen them transform from traditional industrial relations to a contemporary employment relations. This cannot be far from the truth as far as Australia is concerned. As from 1990 human resource management in Australia has gone through tremendous changes; changes in laws and regulations, changes in infrastructure, a reduction in the number of trade unions, increases in contractual and negotiated employment and a change from a centralised form of managing employment to a decentralised kind characterised by negotiations (Bamber, Lansbury and Wailes, 2011). Because of these changes there has been a change from using the term industrial relations to employment relations. To begin with, by 1921 about half of the Australian workforce was unionised but in in 1990 the union density had declined to 40% and by 2007 it was 19.5% (Deery and Mitchel, 1999). This decline can be attributed to contraction of manufacturing employment which had a traditionally strong unionism, growth of the service sector, a sector with dismal unionism and legislative changes leading to improved and effective human resource management practices. Legal changes relevant to the industrial relations can be traced from 1993 when the Keating government in the Industrial Relations Reform Act 1993 allowed federal non-union collective agreements to be certified for the first time. These reforms allowed employers to make agreements with their employees without involving unions (Lansbury 2000). Statistics in Australia also point to a system where the industrial relations have become less collectivised and more individualised progressively hence tending to unitarism rather than pluralism. This has been seen through many ways; first being the diminishing award coverage of employees, secondly the emergence individual contracts among the work force. The Australian workforce survey of 1995 showed that 26% of workplaces had non-managerial employees on individual contracts (Deery and Mitchell, 1999). These changes were accelerated in 1996 by the Howard Liberal National’s introduction of the Workplace Relations Act which made it possible to register individual contracts otherwise referred to us Australian Workforce Agreements where the government supported the growth of individual rather than collective arrangements at workplaces (Lansbury 2000). In 2005 the Howard Liberal government passed the highly controversial ‘Work Choices’ amendments to the Workplace Relations Act which show significant restriction on union activities reduced the role of Australian Industrial Relations Commission (Bamber, Lansbury and Wailes, 2011). There was also in 2009 the enactment of the Fair Work Act which enhanced protection of employees from unfair dismissal, unions were to engage with employers but won’t compel employers to enter into agreements. Minimum wages were set by A Minimum Wages Panel under Fair Work Australia. The working hours are also increasing to deal with the problem of underemployment as one in five workers is employed for more than 50 hours a week. Also under the Fair Work Act of 2009 the employees are free to request flexible working arrangements and employers are obliged to respond (Bamber, Lansbury and Wailes, 2011). This has empowered the employees as they enjoy autonomy and free their jobs are secure. This approach has reduced unrest among the Australian workforce and has led to increased performance by the workforce. These factors have also contributed to unitarism in the workforce and enhanced human resource strategies (Lansbury, 2000). On the contrary, the same cannot be said of China as the developments and changes have been restricted by increased government intervention. In China, labour structures were developed in the 1990s when the first Trade Union Law and Labour Law were enacted in 1992 and 1994 respectively. This provided the necessary structure for collective bargaining and labour dispute settlement (Lee, 2009). Chinese employee and employer relations were characterised by silencing of workers’ organisations that enjoyed autonomy instead it favoured a single centralized trade union. The government designated the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) as the only and legally recognised body to link the workers and state (Ali, 2005). The labour law attempted to create new legal forms directing contract-based employment and provide legal provisions for collective bargaining. This provided a loophole in that it made it possible to convert state jobs to contract based ones. Thousands of state owned enterprises were privatised in 1997 with the view of increasing efficiency and achieving market socialism. This move is in an attempt to conformation to changes by workers and managers. In 1994 the People’s Republic of China passed the labour law to protect the workers’ rights. The trade union law was revised in 2001 hoping that the Official trade union, ACFTU, could be able to get such reforms into becoming law and the government would relax its take on the ACFTU and even willing to allow legislation that could see the trade union represent the views and interests of the workers freely (Shih-wei, 2005). But statistics show the contrary in that the ACFTU remains subordinate to both the party and the government and workers are not satisfied with the incumbent organisation and the government restricts the formation of any other trade unions apart from the official one, ACFTU. China’s employment relations are simply a labour administration system as the party-state dominates the relationship between management and workers (Shih-wei, 2005). Because of this workers conditions in the Chinese arena have deteriorated with very low wages, poor working conditions and work without fringe benefits. This has seen numerous industrial disputes and conflicts resulting into workers collecting venting their hunger and withdrawing their tools. For instance there were 515,000 workers in 2003 involved in collective disputes which translate to 61.6% of the total number of workers involved in labour disputes. These labour disputes have largely been attributed to compensation which is poor, economic remedies, welfare schemes and labour insurance since workers are not guaranteed of their job security (Shih-wei, 2005). In comparing the employment relations between Australia and China, Australia’s employment relations is one characterised by what can be referred to as neo-unitarism where there is a decline in trade unions, increased contractual agreements between employer and employee and effective human resource management systems that have seen employees participate in decision making within the workplace and void of industrial disputes. On the contrary, that of China is characterised by a single trade union which is being held hostage by the government and hence increased industrial conflicts and lack of employee autonomy and job security. Conclusion In conclusion, it is correct that most countries have transformed from industrial relations to employment relations, a good example being Australia but China is yet to get there fully. This aspect of employment relations in China can be attributed to governance systems inherent in the country. References Ali, M. (2005). Globalisation and industrial relations of China, India and South Korea: An argument for divergence. Retrieved from the University of Rhode Island website: http://www.uri.edu/research/lrc/research/papers/Ali_Globalization.pdf Bamber, G. J., Lansbury. D., and Wailes, N. (Eds.). (2011). International and comparative employment relations: Globalisation and change. Sydney: Allen and Unwin. Deery, S., and Mitchell, R. (Eds.). (1999). Employment relations-Individualisation and union exclusion: An international study. Sydney: Federation Press. Dundon, T., and Gollan, P. J. (2007). Reconceptualising voice in the non-union workplace. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(7), 1182-1198. Dundon, T., and Rollinson, D. (2007). Understanding employment relations. Maidenhead: McGraw Hill. Lansbury, R. D. (2000). Workplace change and employment relations reform in Australia: Prospects for a new social partnership. The Drawing Board: An Australian Review of Public Affairs, 1(1), 29-45. Lee, C. H. (2009). Industrial relations and collective bargaining in China. Geneva: International Labour Office. Shi-wei, P. (2005). Transforming employment relations in China: Market reform and the choice of labour policies. Retrieved from the Worcester Polytechnic Institute website: http://www.wpi.edu/Images/CMS/MPI-SLOAN/labor-relations.pdf Read More