Industries Relations in Australia - Assignment Example

Running Head: Industries Relations Industries Relations Name Course Tutor Date Question 3 The move to decentralize Australian labour laws has been received with mixed reactions. Some quarters view this as a positive move while others hold opposite opinion. To the supporters of the decentralization, the passage and enactment of the new laws such as Fair Work Act 2009 can be described as one of the major milestones in the Australian’s industrial relations and the entire labour industry. The legislation sums up all the relevant laws and implementing agencies into one Act. The new Act from January 2010 is set to replace the laws which established AIRC. The law seeks to sanitise the labour market in Australia and ensure that ‘good faith’ is applied in all the aspects of collective bargaining. Also, the law is aimed at promoting the activities of the trade unions, expanding worker’s rights and establishing working standards that would be applied nationally. According to the superorders, these new laws are aimed at inculcating a culture of a modern friendly work place; apart from being, simple and devoid of adversarial processes that have all along characterised the difficult to sustain WorkChoices. It is worth noting that the government’s arguments contrasts the ones held by those who oppose the new laws. While those opposed to the laws argue that the laws are recipe for industrial conflicts and low productivity, the government poses that the laws are the best so far and allows for flexibility . To contrast the two view points, it is imperative to look at the possible changes that will come with the implementation of the laws. With the new laws, several changes with respect to Work Choices and Forward with Fairness have emerged. Significantly, replacement of AIRC by FWA from the 1st of January 2010 is a major change. In effect, FWA will act as the new institution and policy instrument in conflict and dispute resolutions and bridge for collective bargaining. The new Act also complements and supplements some of the roles of AIRC as stipulated under the Work Choices laws. More specifically, the 'Forward with Fairness' just like the AIRC under the Work Choices of 2006 has the powers to end any “bargaining period in extreme circumstances” (Billing, 2009, p.3). Those changes are bound to come with respect to new approaches in bargaining, bargaining in good faith, dispute resolution and negotiating workplace agreements, including collective agreements and the role of individual agreements. It is however logical to concur with those against the new laws that the enactment of the new laws does not guarantee creation of more job opportunities. This is because the tight rules may result into crowding out effect and fall in the level of investment. The sentiments of those who support the new laws, that they promote ‘fairness and flexibility’ are based on a number of factors and strong points of the legislation among them the level playing field in the collective bargaining. Impliedly, through the collective bargaining, the Forward with Fairness Act of 2009 seeks to eradicate the exploitative “take it or leave it” employment terms that come with individual bargaining. Involvement of the parties in a collective bargaining process enhances fairness as the spirit of give and take as opposed to reactive hoarse trading tactics is outlawed. The opposition’s arguments that the laws are flawed and less beneficial to the economy, in some way are valid. Though the laws call for openness in bargaining, this may not be guaranteed in the work place where the employees have an upper hand. At the same time, the laws only recommend that the parties involved in the collective bargaining process need to act in good faith. Specifically, ‘good faith bargaining’ is a strategic obligation that is imposed on the trade unionists and their organisations. However, if there is an abuse of the system, it may be hard to force the negotiators to agree. According to the parliament of Australia, the new laws were designed with a view to create a win-win bargaining framework that is carried out in good faith and allows for voluntary making of agreements. However, the opposition’s view such kinds of voluntary processes as vague and tantamount to conflict. At the same time, the laws do not seal the loopholes in child labour practices. Some firms may resort to employment of child labour, thus reducing chances for the adults to get jobs. To enhance productivity, the same legislation should apply to the rampant child labour exploitation through ratification of relevant ILO laws (U.S. Department of Labour Bureau of International Labour Affairs, 2004). The new law is set to positively enhance the rights of workers and ensure that the compensation they get is commensurable to the work input. Several awards are outlined in the FWA Act. For example under the minimum wages, issue covered include “overtime and penalty rates, types of employment, leave and leave loading” (Roth, 2010, p.3). New approach to awards as stipulated in the minimum wage rates have also been set out by the FWA Act. Unlike before, minimum wage awards will be reviewed yearly so as to make the Australian labour market at par with the modern international standards. As such a department; Minimum Wage Panel has been created to work under the FWA ostensibly to ‘set modern award minimum wages” (Billing, 2009, p.5). This is a very significant improvement in the labour issues in Australia, on the employees’ side. However, the new laws may not be beneficial to all the employees. Specifically, the law stipulates that the modern awards will only cover low income employees whose earnings are below $100,000 per anum. The proponents of the law however argue that the law has very many positive implications to employees, labour unions and the society in general. A major positive change in the determination of the minimum wage award lies in the proactive, consultative and collaborative approach that the FWA’s Panel is required to follow. All the stakeholders and relevant bodies as well as individuals with interest in the minimum wage awards are entitled to submit their written proposals to the body within a given adequate time. These include the government through the labour ministry, the labour unions, employers, employees and other stakeholders. Evidently, the FWA Act is very fair to the work all the place parties and stakeholders who have the chance to submit their views and comments for consideration for wage awards. This is a major shift to the approaches which have been used before. FWA therefore cannot carry out any minimum wage awards through adversarial proceeding, as it has to closely scrutinies all issues at hand. Emphatically, this differs from the near haphazard “previous approach of the AIRC in National Wage and Safety Net Review cases” (Billing, 2009, p.5). Finally, the clause calling for good faith in bargaining has remarkably made easy, the process of collective bargaining in the states and nationally. In strict terms, the law requires that all the obligations imposed on the concerned persons and bodies must be met. All the processes of bargaining must be overseen and registered by the new body-FWA. The basis for the entrenchment of acts of good faith that are expected from the bargainers is to ensure that all the parties are not only serious but committed to the rule of law, the process itself, need for modernisation of labour issues and making of mutual agreements. The parties who are obliged to abide by the laws and obligations of a collective bargaining initiative are the workers’/employees’ and employer’s representatives. These two parties normally bargain collectively through an officially registered trade union. Based on the above arguments, it is evident that the new laws are the best so far and offer ‘one stop shop’ for labour laws in a more flexible manner. As such, the laws should be supported due to the numerous benefits that enormously outweigh the possible negative impacts. Question 4 Labour unions which are formed in good faith promote bargaining and bargaining in good faith, between the unions and the employers. In good faith bargaining, the process has not only resulted into a more simplified and flexible process but also created more open and trustworthy frame work that is beneficial to the counterparties, that is, the labour unions and employers . This differs from the reactive labour unions with policies based on a “command and control’ processes. As such, the labour / trade unions are still relevant today. The trade unions act as messengers of the employees in a collective bargaining process so that no employee is singled out as being driven by attempts to interfere with work setting. Bargaining entails the processes and procedures which are specially followed by both parties to an employment-employer and employer- either directly or indirectly through representatives with an aim of carrying out negotiations to agree on employment provisions/ conditions. The most outstanding and recommendable role played by the labour unions in the bargaining process as well as approach to industrial relations in is the creation of a level playing field in the work related bargains. The relevance of the trade unions is also based on the fact that collective bargaining by workers’ representatives and trade unions is given a strong legal backing and recognition. Descriptively, collective bargaining refers to a process through which “employers, employees and the bargaining representatives bargain for an enterprise agreement” (AHA, 2009, p.1). This process, collective bargaining, is a very fundamental part of employee-employee relationship and dispute resolution. The main reasons behind this are the possible benefits that come with the process. First, the collective bargaining results into a collective agreement when the process is successfully completed. Since the bargaining parties need each other, the outcome will lead to harmonious work relationships that are satisfying and mutually beneficial. Secondly, the benefit of collective bargaining can be explained by looking at the weakness of individually fronted work agreements. This system may only work well in fields which are highly paying and the sources of labour are few. Thirdly, collective bargaining is known to promote good and competitive compensation that is in line with the economic realities and also seeks to promote productivity and good working relationships. Trade unions also promote education of the members. Education of the employees plays a very critical role in their development and skill enhancement. Through education, and call for affirmative actions, the trade unions normally help to advance some causes which are socially beneficial. For example in the US, the trade unions have promoted and called for gender balance. This is because there have been fewer women corporate leaders despite the fact that there are many women in the job market. Despite the fact that there are women who are highly qualified to be in a corporate body’s executive position, ignorance and lack of information work against them. The women may not have the knowledge of the existence of such positions while some employers may not only fail to identify such talents but also be ignorant of the fact that women managers are as good as the male. As such there is need for a deliberate attempt to “create an information resource” through which the women capabilities can be espoused, ostensibly to allow employers to tap the talents and skills to be used appropriately and conveniently (Stephen, 1994, p.3). these have been the roles played by the labour unions in the process of making all the members of an organization to have an equal chance in employment. The labour unions are also critical pressure groups that keep the government and other relevant stakeholders on toes over the challenges in work environment and need to make new laws that befit the modern labour market and work environment. For example, despite the enactment of many laws abolishing any form of discrimination in work place, the practice is still widespread in many countries. Discrimination based on gender is a major undoing for the course of women advancement career wise. This situation is characterized by ‘glass ceilings’ where most organization’s policies and promotion processes are selectively and deliberatively designed to favour the male gender. According to Olsson and Walker (2004) there exists “discursive practices” which work against female empowerment but effectively serve to perpetuate corporate masculinity. As a result, there exist adversative relationship that defines feminism and corporate power. To deal with such unfair practices, which still exist despite changes in laws, the labour unions are still relevant. This is because they act as the agents of employees who champion their rights and engineer positive changes. Even with the most successful corporate bodies, there have been some aspects of employee mistreatment or failure to put in place a good work environment. Since the employees may fear to make known their grievances to the management on individual basis, it is the trade unions that can act on their behalf. For example, the labour unions especially in China are calling for unionization of Wal-Mart’s employees due to their poor working conditions. However, failure by the company to comply with this requirement by the stakeholders, more so in developing world, have negatively impacted on the unionization quest thus impeding the employees bargaining power and possibility of being pushed into a collective bargaining schemes. As such, the relevance of trade unions is great, and organizations which do not allow their workers to join unions ,ay suffer from negative publicity and other counterproductive consequences. Unethical practices by corporate bodies also justify the importance of trade unions. This argument can be fully illustrated by looking at Wal-mart labour union and employee relations issues. To the company, the high sales and revenue turnovers appear to be the adopted culture which has a teleological perspective, as realization of these two objectives seem to be what is most valued from which all other activities and actions like labour exploitation derive their ends. The company is accused to have had its employments on discriminative grounds resulting into filing of fifteen cases against it since 1994 by the U.S Equal Opportunity Commission (Ferrell, 2009). Further, the discrimination manifest itself in relation to promotion where, of the women employees who make almost 70% of the workforce, about 10% are in top management positions while the disable have also been discriminated against in employment. Maintenance of sweat shop conditions in foreign stores like Swaziland where the employees were paid below their countries’ minimum wage rates and employment of illegal immigrants in USA against the knowledge of the authorities are also unethical practices that have been adopted by the company. At the same time, the company drastically reduced the benefits that accrue to its employees like reduction in lichens, non insurance cover for more that half of employees, discrimination of part time employers from the health schemes with a strategic aim of curtailing costs escalation have been pointed out as some of the unethical practices. Unethical acts have also been portrayed in terms of inhuman working conditions like in California where meal breaks have been denied, intimidation of employees who seek to be unionized. As such the fear of employees unionization can be explained by teleological ethical perspectives in whereby allowing such actions may in future bring challenges to the status quo due to awareness of existence other possible means of achieving their goals to employees Conclusively, the trade unions, despite the many positive changes that have taken place in the HRM arena are still very relevant. References Ferrell (2009). Wal-Mart: the Challenge of Managing Relationships with Stakeholders. Australian Hotels Association (AHA) (2009). Collective Bargaining Framework. Retrieved April 30, 2010 , from http://www.aha.org.au/Collecting%20Bargaining%20Framework.pdf. Australian Government (2009). Australia’s Fair Work system: Fair Work Australia Institutions. Retrieved February 4, 2009, from http://www.deewr.gov.au/WorkplaceRelations/NewWorkplaceRelations/Documents/FactSheets/FactSheet_2.pdf Billing, S. (2009). Fair Work Bill 2008: Fairer for Who? Retrieved April 30, 2010 , from http://www.hrnicholls.com.au/archives/vol29/Billing2009.pdf. Fair Work Australia (2010). Bargaining & workplace determinations. Retrieved April 30, 2010 , from http://www.fwa.gov.au/index.cfm?pagename=agreementsdeterminations Fair Work Online (2009). Enterprise Bargaining fact sheet. Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.fairwork.gov.au/Fact-sheets-tools/Pages/FWO-fact-sheet-Enterprise-Bargaining.aspx#terms. Olsson,S. & Walker, R. (2004). "Two wo-men and the boys": patterns of identification and differentiation in senior women executives' representations of career identity. Women in Management Review, 19(5/6), 244-251. Parliament of Australia (2009). Senate Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Committee: Chapter 4 - Bargaining Framework. Retrieved February 4, 2009, from http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/eet_ctte/fair_work/report/c04.htm U.S. Department Of Labour Bureau of International Labour Affairs (2004). Laws governing exploitative child labour report. Australia Retrieved February 4, 2009, from http://www.dol.gov/ilab/media/reports/usfta/childlabor.pdf. Read More