Federal Election - Don't Forget Workplace Laws still need improvements
By Brian Boyd, VTHC Secretary
19 July 2010
On Saturday 17 July 2010, the ALP federal government called a snap election. After a lot of exaggerated angst around the demise of Kevin Rudd hopefully we can get down to what really matters. Tackling climate change, treating asylum seekers properly and getting a fairer tax system are important issues. However industrial relations has emerged through the fog at least in the early days of the formal election campaign. It deserves to be out there for two reasons – there is unfinished business in terms of Gillard’s Fair Work Act 2009 and it is a touch-stone issue for the conservatives, who would love to, despite desperate public utterances, to go back to Howard’s regimented system.
A second term ALP government should be lobbied by the union movement for more improvements to the FW Act, as it contains to this day WorkChoices–type restrictions on rights at work. Right of entry, full collective bargaining rights, what can be bargained about, how and when, are just some of the outstanding issues that breach ILO conventions. A suite of basic amendments to the legislation is required.
In contrast Tony “mad monk” Abbott, Eric Abetz and the rest of the conservative (Lib/ Nat) crew can not help themselves by sending ‘signals” to their big business constituents that by any means possible they will work to apply the current IR laws to the letter, with the aim to maximise employer control over employees bargaining rights.
Abbott may insist he won’t touch the Fair Work Act, if he wins, for the next term of the Federal Parliament. He says WorkChoices is “dead”, “buried” and “cremated” but does he protest, too much!?
Eric Abetz talks about “tweaking” the current legislation.
The FW Act allows for ‘ministerial directions’ and ‘changes via regulations’ anyway. Abbott knows this and therefore can say “we will work within the legislation”.
He also says “if we want to change things, we will go the FWA, the independent umpire, to try to ensure that the existing legislation works as well as it possibly can”.
Abbott is well aware many of the Howard appointments to the AIRC were left in place by Gillard when the FWA was created last year.
He knows that FW Act contains many clauses that were in the WorkChoices Act. The union movement knows it also, as over the last year or so many disputes have run foul of such clauses, never mind the odd ministeral direction.
Abbott can use the FW Act to assist his employer allies by using for example the individual flexibility agreement provisions more vigorously, in order to undermine the partial re-introduction of collective rights.
Journalist Michelle Grattan may suggest “the 2010 (federal election) campaign has started where the 2007 one left off – with a tangle over WorkChoices”. It’s a bit more complicated than that. The tangle in fact is unpacking the mischievous claim that WorkChoices is dead, made by both major parties. Gillard is right when she says Abbot dreams of bringing back the ‘fierce dog’ called WorkChoices, Abbott’s claim he can work with Gillard’s FW Act shows there are I.E.D’s contained within the Gillard legislation. These elements continue to give comfort to the dark forces opposed to genuine collective bargaining and workers rights in general.
No fair dinkum working Australian wants to see Tony Abbott in the Lodge. However, it is not un-Australian to continue to campaign for better workplace legislation, especially at election time.
And don’t forget the other ‘dog’ in the scheme of things, the ABCC. It is yet to be dealt with as promised.
