The Award Modernization System - Essay Example

Award Modernization The employee and employer rights are usually protected by several governmental bodies an example being enforceable employment policies and guidelines also known as awards. These awards have however been reviewed and rationalized with an aim of creating a modern award system. This process is referred to as award modernization which was created and is in the process of implementation by the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. (AIRC, 2009). Among the general issues discussed by the system is the amendment of flexibility awards facilities which allow employees and the employer to vary an award term by agreement. This allows the under 18 employees to get a guardian or parent’s approval on agreement. The system also creates provision for clauses regarding annual leave, transition onto new awards and the school based apprentice clause. The creation of new awards mainly has a national coverage amongst all industries and occupation lines. Therefore, award modernization’s major objective is to reduce the various types of awards from the system. Examples of the awards to be replaced are the Federal Awards and NAPSA’s. The new modern award system is operational in conjunction with the new Australian workplace relations system which is to be launched in January 2010. Modern award’s stipulation on the National Employment Standard is that there will be an inclusion of 10 minimum employment conditions which will be tailored to the needs of various occupations and industries. (David, 2009). Nevertheless, each modern award contains a clause that will enable easy negotiations between the employee and the employer on appropriate ways of satisfying their individual needs. The award modernization system is however faced with major industrial issues mainly due to the National Coverage that generalizes industries. As a result, the modern award scheme has negative impacts which can lead to net job losses in the south east and a heavy drop on local economic growth according to the vice president of Monut Gambier Chamber of commerce Peter Gandolfi. He continues to urge the government to most importantly consult with the various industries before introducing the new awards because it is not right to lump a whole raft of industries under one award scheme. This is mainly because different industries have different needs. For example, the CBD industrial expectations are different from the farming industrial community. Major debates have risen due to the award modernization system which emphasizes that there is the need for flexibility amongst various industries to allow easy creation of jobs. An example is the proposed double and a half on Public Holidays and double time pay rates for employees on Sundays which could be unfavorable to the workers and employees locally. Special considerations should be made on regional industries. (Gandolfi, 2009). Among the Industrial relation issues debated by the workplace Relation Minister Julia Gillard is the review of the awards modernization process with regard to generalization of all industries. This was after restaurants and pharmacy’s negotiated for concessions with the government. The AUSVEG is the National Peak Industries body which represents Australian vegetation and potato grower’s interests. According to this body, the award modernization scheme will cause significant impact especially to the Australian vegetation industry. The impact ranges from increased production to rise in the regional areas unemployment. The impact also extends to the vegetable growers where their working hours, piece rates and the piece work loadings for farmers will rise from 12.5% to 15%. As a result AIRC has been instructed by the Ministry for Workplace relations to come up with a neutral process that will neither favor the employees nor the employer. The horticultural sector, being the worst affected, will have to be carefully reconsidered. Open discussion will therefore have to be employed regarding the amendments to the new modernized award system for the benefit of both the employees and the employer in the Australian Vegetable Industry. Among the groups concerned include; AUSVEG, Horticultural Australia Council, Australian Industry Group and the National Farmers Federation. In addition, another example of an industrial relation sector that is greatly affected is the Chiropractors Association of Australia (CAA). This body usually represents Chiropractors in Australia who are over 2,500 members. Debate has risen among the CAA after they were recently notified that the New Health Service award will include and cover Chiropractors under the modernization awards. The CAA submitted their grievances to the commission for further considerations. Their major concern was the inclusion of their profession in the award which they respectfully requested the commission to remove from the award scheme. This is because there has never been an award covering Chiropractors and their inclusion compliant to the modern award request. They have award free traditionally due to the professional nature of their role. (Alexander, 2006). In conclusion, modernization award raises major issues to the industrial relations due the generalization of the award modernization to industries that do not necessarily require it. Good faith Bargaining Bargaining is characterized by negotiations that are aimed at substantiating agreements in various work related circumstances. Australia’s Fair Work Act 2009’s major role is promoting better rights for Australian employees and their families. (Marshal, 2009). The Act emphasizes on good faith bargaining which encourages open communication during negotiation between parties. For bargaining to be of good faith, it must focus on the key good faith bargaining requirements. The requirements include attending to meetings at reasonable times and dedicating full participation to the negotiations during bargaining. In addition, one should disclose relevant information at the required time and manner. (Forsyth, 2009). For effective and fair bargaining, the response to proposals should be prompt, we should give genuine proposal considerations before conclusions, we should refrain from bad conduct during negotiation which at times undermines association freedom and lastly we should recognize the presence of other bargaining representatives for agreements. Bargaining does not necessarily require any formal notification. Therefore, both employers and employees simply make a unanimous agreement to start negotiation. In cases where an employer does not want to bargain, the employees and their representatives are protected by Fair Work Australia which assists them to determine whether there lays a majority employee support for negotiating an enterprise agreement. This can be done through petitions or ballots. If FWA determines the existence of a majority support, the employer will therefore be required to collectively bargain with the relevant employees. In such cases, a scope order is usually implemented and the employer is required to notify the employees within a 14 days period regarding their rights to be represented in the bargain negotiations. The employees then appoint their representative who will participate in representing their needs to the employer for negotiations. The representatives must however be independent from the employer influences. If the employer or an employee representative breaches bargaining orders, FWA may arbitrate through dictating a workplace determination. This should be after they have satisfied that all other reasonable alternative for reaching agreements are exhausted and there is no hope that the agreement will ever be reached. Good Faith bargaining is aimed at dealing with major power imbalances especially in the case of collective bargaining under the regime of enterprise bargaining. Despite all this a group of employees have directed criticism publicly regarding the empowerment of WAIRC by the good faith bargaining system which allows issuing of binding enterprise orders on non-compliant parties. This has given rise to debates on the need to review the system. (Peter, 2009). This affects the employer’s organization which has a preference for arrangements that are made on an individual level and they therefore have no need for third parties such as commissions or unions. It is greatly evident that the good faith bargaining system cannot apply in such level industrial organizations. According to HR. Nicholls Society, the legislative change in West Australia has led to the state moving from ‘best’ Industrial Relations to worst. FWA has taken a questionable effort of stopping votes on separate enterprise agreements due to debates that brought forward the issue that most employers were not engaging in good faith bargaining. The new system increases conflicts between most Australian employers and union movements due to disagreements regarding the new system’s requirements under the Fair Work Act. The controversy is whether the union or the employee’s representatives can stop an employer from bargaining with its employees through FWA. An example is a case where the employer comes up with an agreement for its employees where they are expected to vote. Is the use of a bargaining agent the most appropriate way of intervening in that process? The question for debate is whether there is an abuse of the FWA’s powers. (Alexander, 2006). The employer’s concern is how far the negotiation with a union can satisfy the good faith system. From an employer point of view is that the system disables their ability to make organizational decisions regarding the employees. In conclusion, good faith bargaining principles are a distinctive industrial relation feature in state jurisdictions. However, its utilization In Western Australia seems to have limited comparable provisions. As a result, it is faced by strategic industrial relation implications. References Alexander, R 2006, Understanding Australian Industrial Relation + Understanding Industrial Relations Supplement, Cengage Learning Australia. Australian Industrial relations Commission 2009, Award Modernization: General and Transitional Issues Marshal, G 2009 and Australian Parliament, Fair Work Bill 2008 [provisions], the committee: Australia. David, C 2009, Australia: Australian Industrial Relations Commission Decision – Award Modernization. Viewed 07 October, 2009. http://www.mondaq.com.au/australia/article.asp?articleid=85682 Gandolfi, P 2009, Award Modernization concerns. Retrieved 7 October 2009 http://www.borderwatch.com.au/archives/4372 Forsyth, A 2009, Fair Work: the new workplace laws and the Work Choices legacy, Federation Press. Peter, V 2009, Good Faith Bargaining – The Battle Begins. Retrieved 7 October, 2009 http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Good+Faith+Bargaining+.+The +Battle+Begins.-a0208345380 Read More