Workplace Reforms in 2005:

1
Workplace Reforms in 2005 Playing Games or
Playing For Australias Future? ACT IR
Society Conference
Scott Barklamb ACCI Manager Workplace
Relations 16 June 2005
2
ACCI

• Australias largest most representative
  business organisation.
• Represent
• 350,000 employers / Employ 4 million
• Promote WR policy reform (key role)
• Seek influence policy agenda / reform.

3
THIS IS NOT A GAME

• Before start - must address todays topics
• WR is Not A Game
• Not for employers -- Not for employees Not for
  the country
• Umpire
• Loaded Dice
• Winner takes all
• Tired inappropriate metaphor.
• Wrong frame of ref. for this important policy
  debate.

- Inaccurate / over-simplification - Emotive
4

• Question 1
• Does the prospect of a Coalition majority in
  parliament provide for the Government to
  undertake radical change in the Industrial
  Relations system?

5
WHAT DO YOU MEAN?

• If you mean can it be done
• No doubt Senate majority allows changes.
• Hopefully Court challenges will fail
• Cooperation better approach.
• Challenges combat not in the national interest.
  
• Legal success would only perpetuate complexity.
• If you are asking about mandate
• Issue for the politicians / public.
• No secret how Government wants to reform system.
• No secret what ACCI has wanted.

6
THIS IS NOT RADICAL CHANGE

• Dont confuse extensive with radical change.
• Builds on known proven reforms.
• Evolutionary not revolutionary.
• Not NZ 90 --- Not Vic 92.
• System will still be
• Highly Regulated prescriptive complex.
• Based on paternalism worst case scenarios.

7
NATIONAL SYSTEM

• Overdue rather than radical reform.
• Crying national sore for decades.
• Correcting the unacceptable - not radical.
• About removing replication - little net loss.
• Major rights and protections retained
• Awards, agreements, termination claims, tribunal
• Conciliation and arbitration of disputes.

8
MINIMUM WAGES

• Look at whats radical in international terms
• Courts setting wages (arbitration by
  non-economists).
• Ignoring economic orthodoxy (e.g. employment
  effects)
• 26,000 minimum wages for 10 million employees.
• Sensible change
• Moving towards international mainstream /
  practice.
• Bringing greater expertise to bear.
• Delivering superior process and outcomes.
• Focus on what is retained Min wages, awards etc.

9
MINIMUM STANDARDS

• Aust Fair Pay Conditions Standard.
• Cant be radical to extend safety net.
• Breaking nexus to unions / disputes.
• Statutory protection for all.
• Right direction for the future.

10
AGREEMENT MAKING

• May actually be radical!
• Will deliver actual choice
• Will actually trust people to make decisions
• Transcending paternalism mature, not radical.
• Sensible changes to make agts easier.

11
AGREEMENT MAKING

• Some locked out of Agt. making
• By cost, by industry, by complexity.
• By min wage levels.
• Look at retained protections
• Coercion / duress / discrimination.
• Agts already exceed awards
• Not a given that will go to just 5 matters.
• Market will decide is deciding well now.
• Key is ? productivity competitiveness

12
AWARDS

• Radical change you must be joking.
• No net change for anyone
• 4 matters all regulated by other areas of law.
• Remain massively regulated.
• Should go much further 16 matters excessive.
• ACCI will seek opportunities for simplification.

13
TERMINATION LITIGATION

• 100 ee threshold newsworthy.
• But not radical
• Common sense approach.
• Reflects ACCI feedback since early 1990s.
• No UD system prior to 1980s/1990s.
• Not a traditional right under Aust. system.
• Access thresholds used internationally.
• Access thresholds used in many areas of law.
• Justified by experience decisions.
• Radical for SB navigating complex UD law.

14
RADICAL CHANGE?

• Irrelevant to ers ees they want good
  regulation.
• Depends on your perspective.
• Radical compared to Australias past
• Radical change to accepted ways of operating.
• Major change to some institutions and processes.
• Not radical compared to
• International practice.
• Reform in other areas of law.
• International consensus on best policy.
• Where we need to go Just a further step.

15

• Topic 2
• Is the view of business legitimate that this
  opportunity needs to be taken in order for
  Australia to maintain its productivity advantage
  and encourage efficiencies in production?

16
ASKING

• 1. Why / whether reform is needed
• 2. Whether ACCIs views are legitimate

17
WHY CHANGE IS VITAL - NOW!

• Need more prod efficiency jobs.
• Prod data falling (Dec Mar, Labour).
• Treasury research reform will ? productivity.
• ½ m unemployed ½ m underemployed not good
  enough.
• Agreement making is stalled
• Stable award only rump.
• Bargaining fatigue. Pattern bargaining.
• Must kick start the next step in national
  improvement
• Competitors not standing still.

18
WE KNOW WHAT WORKS

• Right direction for policy change proven
• More agreements
• Deregulation / decentralisation
• Award reform / less award reliance
• More flex, greater choices
• ? Lowest common denominator regulation.
• Runs are on the board.

19
WHERE IS THE PROBLEM?

• Dire predictions not borne out
• Wages ? Higher
• Low paid ? Better off
• No widespread exploitation / disadvantage
• Sky yet to fall after 87, 93, 96 etc etc etc.
• Rhetoric not borne out by experience.
• No reason to believe rhetoric this time.

20
IS BUSINESS VIEW LEGIT?

• Of course it is.
• Experience shows us what works in Aust.
• Not just our view
• OECD, IMF, RBA Governor, Commentators etc.
• Our competitors not standing still.
• Previous bipartisan support for reform direction.
  
• ? Need to go much, much further.

21

• Topic 3
• Will a winner take all approach to changes in the
  industrial system ensure that if Labor wins
  office in the future they will introduce their
  own radical change and perpetuate major changes
  back and forth in industrial relations?

22
WE CAN ALL BE WINNERS

• Not about winner takes all. Not a game.
• WP Relations is not a zero sum game.
• Experience is that win-win is possible.
• Need to provide this opportunity more widely.
• About making more winners.
• This must be the aim!

23
POLICY IMPLICATIONS

• But this is a question about politics.
• Asking about
• Implications for future reforms / policy.
• See-saw policy making.

24
SEE-SAW POLICY MAKING?

• Of course ALP Govt. would amend legislation.
• Bur is not a given that ALP will fall for
  simplistic see-saw policymaking
• ALP kick-started reforms in 1980s and 1990s.
• Broad policy direction remains unambiguous.
• Ongoing case for bargaining, regulatory reform,
  deregulation decentralisation.
• Re-election for an ALP govt. would be based on
• Sound government economic mgt.
• Not ideology.

25
SEE-SAW POLICY MAKING?

• Challenge make see-saw policy impossible / off
  the agenda.
• Reforms are sound they will work.
• (We hope) No party would abandon something that
  is working.
• Remove any policy option of changing back.

26
SEE-SAW POLICY MAKING?

• Follow NZ UK (not WA).
• Aust public will punish see-saw policy.
• Challenge to become like the GST??
• Irreversible.

27
IN PRACTICE THIS MEANS

• Entrenching reform
• On the ground / in workplaces / In hearts
  minds.
• Get into operation ASAP / widely used as possible
  
• Show that lies are lies get to policy truth
  here.
• Have reform judged on operation / merits
• Sound ideas / will work judge on that basis.

28
WHAT IS RADICAL/CONSERVATIVE?

• Any swing back wouldnt be radical.
• Would be conservative / reactionary.
• Conservative position
• AIRC only no change
• Higgins legacy is the only possible way
• Retain federal state overlap

29

• SOME CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

30
CONCLUSION

• Addressed 3 questions asked today.
• Might equally have asked
• Benefits / costs of historical approaches?
• How well estab. system is serving us?
• How else to unlock ? prod. jobs?(If you dont
  like it what would you do?)

31
CONCLUSION

• Change / Reform always scary.
• Always advocates of status quo / retreat.
• Sky always falling in for someone.
• Would we go back to high tariffs / managed
  exchange rate?
• Would we want Govt. to again run huge sections
  of the economy?
• When has turning the clock back ever worked?

32
CONCLUSION

• Right direction Good changes
• What ACCI wants to see happen.
• But just a further step on reform journey.
• After reform will still be
• Very regulated (internationally)
• Well short of where we should be.

33
A FINAL THOUGHT

• This will happen.
• Move past sensationalism / rhetoric.
• If you disagree ? engage policy debate.
• If you disagree ? make it work for your members.
• Challenge for all of us to
• Engage current reality we face.
• Adapt survive use opportunities offered.
• Contribute to positive future policy / next
  steps.

34
Workplace Reforms in 2005 Playing Games or
Playing For Australias Future? ACT IR
Society Conference
Scott Barklamb ACCI Manager Workplace
Relations 16 June 2005