
[Home] Contact\|Feedback\|Links\|Privacy\|



	Journal Archive


	Song & Poem Competition

Abbott�s back and nothing�s changed � new bills to attack workers

By Andrew Thomas

No one can accuse federal Workplace Relations Minister Tony Abbott of being slow off the mark, or having second thoughts about undermining workers� rights and their ability to improve their wages and conditions.

Within days of federal parliament opening in February following the November federal election, Abbott had introduced four pieces of legislation that spell 'bad news' for workers.

The first piece of legislation will mean that no employee working for a company with less than 20 employees will be able to pursue an unfair dismissal claim in the Federal Industrial Relations Commission. Regardless of how and why they are sacked, these employees will simply have nowhere to go. If the employer has more than 20 employees, a claim will still be possible - watch for the creative practices in employment that companies with slightly more than 20 workers invent as a result of this legislation.

To deny an employee the right to pursue an unfair dismissal claim solely on the ground of the number of employees in the company is grossly unfair and discriminatory. To add insult to injury, Abbott has titled the legislation the "Fair Dismissal Bill" - reminiscent of George Orwell's idea of "doublespeak" in his famous novel Nineteen Eighty Four. Abbott actually claims that this legislation will create jobs.

Derail bargaining

The second piece of legislation is designed to undermine a campaign by workers to achieve a decent outcome in enterprise bargaining negotiations. This will be done by putting a barrier in the path of taking protected industrial action. Protected industrial action is taken at appropriate times and where necessary to encourage an obstinate and unreasonable employer to negotiate realistically. If an employer can avoid this, the employer gains a bargaining advantage.

This is precisely what the legislation does.

It will enable an employer to apply to the Commission to suspend a bargaining period and to impose a "cooling off" period on the workers. For an employer under pressure, this will act as a release valve, at least temporarily, and undermine the Union's campaign. Consistent with his use of Orwellian language, Abbott has named this legislation the "Genuine Bargaining Bill", and has buried its real purpose in an attack on "pattern bargaining". This is where Unions pursue similar claims for members in the same industry.
Abbott doesn't say why it is wrong for a Union to seek similar outcomes for members who perform similar work in the same industry.

Secret ballots

The third piece of legislation is also designed to undermine a campaign of enterprise bargaining. Here it is about placing bureaucratic hurdles in the path of protected industrial action by requiring that a so-called "protected action ballot" be held. In this way, it establishes a maze of complex and confusing provisions in the way of workers making their own decisions in their own way.

It has nothing to do with democracy - if a federal election was supposed to be held in the same manner, it would never happen. And unsurprisingly, the employers are not subject to the same confusion if they determine to take protected industrial action. Yet in this case, the employer is permitted to make a submission to the Commission regarding a ballot that does not involve them.
Adding to this, the legislation provides that the Union shall pay 20 per cent of the cost of the ballot - that is a ballot that is neither asked for nor wanted nor required in the first place.

No bargaining fees

The final piece of legislation follows on from the third, in that it is designed to add to the cost to workers and their unions of engaging in enterprise bargaining.
Recently, some unions have had inserted in enterprise agreements clauses providing for the payment of a bargaining fee by non-members who will derive a benefit from the enterprise agreement.
Unions commit a lot of time and resources to negotiating enterprise agreements. The finance comes from members' dues.
A bargaining fee is set in the interests of fairness, to ensure that a minority cannot ride on the back of the majority. Abbott's legislation, being alien to the idea of fairness, outlaws such clauses being included in an enterprise agreement.

Much of this legislation, recently introduced into parliament, is a repeat of old legislation previously rejected by the Senate. It is difficult to see why the Senate should accept what is really old wine put in a new bottle, or in this case, bottles. The wine was off then and it's off now.

The legislation is a blatant attempt to stack the deck even further in the favour of employers. Abbott and his ideological soulmates, in the government and elsewhere, are obsessed with the idea of workers organising collectively and doing something to challenge the ability of employers to set and run their own agenda in their own interests.

The Rail Tram & Bus Union will make submissions to any relevant Senate inquiries established to consider the legislation and will urge the Senate to reject all of the legislation in its entirety.