Why We (Already) Need to Look Beyond Work Choices

By Anthony Forsyth

What kind of labour law or industrial relations system should replace Work Choices?

This might seem an odd question - after all, the new legislation has only been in operation for a little over six months. But the Work Choices Act is widely considered to be a partisan piece of legislation - one that provides too much scope for the untrammeled exercise of managerial power. It is also heavily oriented towards conflict - especially in the bargaining sphere, where the statute sets up a complex, legalistic process for parties to engage in "industrial warfare," without any effective mechanism for dispute resolution.

In his recent Julian Small Lecture, Professor Ron McCallum speculated that Work Choices will not stand the test of time. In his view, it will be substantially revised within six to eight years, for several reasons, including the failure of many employers to engage with the new laws - for example, because they want to treat their employees fairly (rather than engaging in the labour cost-cutting that is now open to them) or they want to avoid its complexity.

Clearly, the outcome of the next federal election will be critical in determining the longevity of the reforms. If the Coalition is re-elected, then Work Choices will probably have a minimum "life" of five years or so. On the other hand, if Labor wins the election, that will be the end of the Work Choices experiment. But apart from the ALP's commitment to "rip up these unfair laws," scrap AWAs, and introduce a firmer basis for collective bargaining, we do not really know what they will put in the place of Work Choices. So with the federal election only twelve months away (maybe less), it is not at all premature to be considering "what next, after Work Choices?"

Forsyth suggests that the central concept underpinning any new industrial relations system should be that of "social partnership." He briefly outlines a couple of key elements of a system based on that concept.