Howard curb on bosses
A looming clash over IR culture
An interesting piece.
Howard curb on bosses
Dennis Shanahan and Sid Marris
August 17, 2005
THE Howard Government is considering tougher laws to control bosses who use new workplace laws to bully or exploit workers, in an attempt to reassure nervous voters about the fairness of its industrial relations reforms.
The Australian has learned that a little-known government agency, the Office of Workplace Services, will be given a much enhanced role in protecting workers from having their wages or work conditions stripped.
Workplace Relations Minister Kevin Andrews told parliament yesterday that "vulnerable workers" would continue to be protected against "inappropriate conduct by employers", but did not go into detail.
The expanded role and powers of the Office of Workplace Services will form part of a wider strategy to re-assure workers that employers will not be able to force them into pay and conditions they do not want.
As the Government works towards producing draft legislation for its industrial relations reforms, Coalition members are trying to counteract the union advertising campaign that depicts workers as being forced on to lower pay and conditions.
Government sources said yesterday that the wider role of the Office of Workplace Services would ensure workers had a free and easily accessible way to challenge bosses who were unfairly trying to use the new laws to break down working conditions.
Policymakers are hoping to boost the office's credibility by encouraging unions to use it to pursue cases of exploitation.
The Office of Workplace Services currently polices the application of federal awards and investigates workers' claims of being underpaid or denied entitlements.
Federal inspectors operate in Victoria, which ceded its powers to the commonwealth in 1998, the ACT and Northern Territory. In Queensland, South Australia and Tasmania, the federal inspectors work with state officers to force employers to pay outstanding wages or apply correct working conditions.
In extreme cases, the inspectors can prosecute employers for underpaying workers.
The Government is looking at an even stronger role for the Office of Workplace Services, known before the first Howard Government reforms as the Industrial Inspectorate, but no final decisions on the detail have been made.
The expansion of the office would complete the process of the Government's plan to have direct agreements at the workplace -- approved by the Employment Advocate and complying with minimum standards set by the new Fair Pay Commission -- to be the mainstay of workplace law. The IRC would still provide voluntary dispute resolution, maintain awards by agreement of employers and unions, and handle unfair dismissal claims.
In parliament yesterday, Mr Andrews said "it will continue to be unlawful to dismiss or to victimise an employee for refusing to agree to a new workplace agreement". He praised the work of the Office of the Employment Advocate and the Office of Workplace Services, attempting to deflect Labor claims that the Coalition's new laws would mean workers were worse off and would face pay cuts.
Mr Andrews said that in 2003-04 there were more than 4700 investigations into breaches of federal industrial laws by the Office of Workplace Services. "Under our proposals it will continue to be unlawful for employees to be dismissed, for example, for refusing to sign an AWA. This won't change," he said.
"It will continue to be unlawful, Mr Speaker, to dismiss a person taking a temporary absence from work due to illness or disability. It will continue to be unlawful to dismiss a worker because of an absence from work because of their family responsibilities. And it will continue to be unlawful, Mr Speaker, in relation to the filing of a complaint or participating in proceedings against an employer involved in alleged violation of laws or regulations.
"None of these things will change under these proposals."
Labor industrial relations spokesman Stephen Smith said Mr Andrews had been "slapped down" over suggestions the new legislation would go to a Senate committee as part of a process to ensure it was right and fair.
"The Prime Minister refused to back his minister and confirm that there would be a Senate inquiry," he said.
A looming clash over IR culture
An interesting piece.