The year 2007 may well be remembered as one being short on major industrial disputation, yet one where industrial relations itself dominated public discussion and political life of the country like no other time in Australia's history. It was a year dominated by the electoral cycle, with both organized labour as well as major employers playing their cards very carefully, lest they provide political ammunition to their political and industrial opponents. Thanks largely to the effectiveness of the union movement's anti Work Choices campaign, major employer groups and their political allies the Howard government found themselves fighting a rearguard, and ultimately losing, battle, valiantly trying to defend the Work Choices regime. At year's end, the Liberal government had lost office, Prime Minister John Howard had lost his own seat in Parliament, and the Rudd Labor Government had been swept to power with a clear mandate to dismantle the Work Choices regime. Yet despite this conclusion to a year dominated by debate over industrial relations, it seems that employers had nevertheless lobbied Labor party leaders successfully enough to secure the continuation of many key components of the former Howard government's industrial relations regime.

In terms of employer matters, the year 2008 may be best characterized as one dominated by change, challenge and Canberra, as the political landscape was transformed, industrial relations legislation was rewritten and global capitalism went into financial meltdown. The new political and economic environment seemed to demand a greater emphasis on consultation, efforts at cooperation and, dare I say it, in some cases even 'consensus'. Nevertheless, employers were nonetheless active in pursuing their own objectives, with the main employer associations preoccupied for most of 2008 lobbying for changes and amendments to the form and substance of Labor's new industrial relations regime, Forward with Fairness. Importantly, the new industrial and legal landscape suggested that the changed status of the 'parties' vis-a-vis awards, is likely to lead to increased competition for relevance among employer associations, leading to a series of amalgamations and rationalization, much as occurred with unions in the 1990s.

By any reckoning, the year 2005 will long be remembered as a watershed year for Australian industrial relations. While there were the usual types of industrial disputes, on-going enterprise bargaining and another round of arguments over the Australian Industrial Relations Commission's (AIRC's) annual safety-net review, the year was dominated by the looming re-writing of Australia's industrial relations regulatory regime, made possible by the Government's surprise majority in the Senate, granted to them in late 2004. Viewed as a looming dark cloud by some or a shining light by others, most of 2005 was spent in anxious anticipation of the Howard government's impending 'WorkChoices' legislation. Employer groups spent much of the year lobbying the Howard government for the types of reforms long cherished, but only dreamed of by employers, for arguably 100 years. A once in a lifetime opportunity had presented itself and employer groups were determined to take full advantage of the situation, by ensuring that the government did not lose its nerve. Perhaps more importantly, however, in addition to lobbying the government, major employer organizations devoted significant resources to building the case for industrial relations reform and attempting to sell that message to the electorate. By year's end, employers had succeeded in the first objective, but had seemingly failed in the second.

No abstract

No abstract