Co‐operation in the employment relationship continues to be a widely lauded goal, but academics, practitioners and policy makers rarely define the concept or analyse systematically its variants. This is problematic because a lack of clarity is a significant barrier to academic discourse and practical implementation in many organizations and countries. This article therefore carefully develops a framework that results in six key perspectives on co‐operation rooted in five assumptions. In addition to fostering a deeper understanding of co‐operation, these six perspectives can be used to theorize alternative employment relations paradigms when co‐operation rather than conflict is viewed as the central construct. Moreover, a dynamic analysis of these six perspectives adds new insights to understanding the challenges of achieving and sustaining truly co‐operative regimes, while also highlighting the need to go beyond structures and practices by incorporating the role of ideas in analyses of the success or failure of co‐operative efforts.

This paper offers an alternative framework for characterizing individualism and collectivism. This framework is constructed in terms of three dimensions of the employment relationship — who makes the rules; who is covered by the rules; and who enforces the rules. The value of the framework is demonstrated by applying it to the analysis of awards in Australia, revealing fundamental changes in the individualist/ collectivist character of awards over the last 20 years.

No abstract

There is a storm brewing over the roles of unions and collective bargaining in Australian employment relations. Unions, frustrated with what they see as practical and legislative restrictions on protection of workers’ rights, seek to ‘change the rules’. Employers, on the other hand, have been successful in restricting or rolling back bargaining rights, supported by their associations, the Coalition government and an assertive interpretation of the Fair Work Act. Add to this the impending federal election and the scene is set for a tempest that could bring industrial relations back to the centre of Australian politics in 2019. The review explores the various elements contributing to the coming storm, including trends in union membership, structure and strategy. It also surveys trends in the number and coverage of collective agreements, wage outcomes and industrial disputes. Two idiosyncractically Australian versions of collective agreement making are also discussed: cooperative bargaining facilitated by the Fair Work Commission and non-union collective agreement making.

This article proposes a new theoretical framework to explain the role of third-party facilitators in interest-based negotiation, and applies the framework in a qualitative case study of a collective bargaining process at an aluminium smelter in Australia. The theoretical framework describes the activities of third parties in terms of the objectives they seek to meet to support bargaining, and the consulting approach they deploy to do so. The case study demonstrates that third parties undertake a range of distinct activities to facilitate bargaining between management and unions, dominated by, although not limited to, a ‘process’ approach to consulting. Moreover, third parties support the development of three types of relationship: their own with the individual parties, as well as relationships between the parties and within each party. While the framework needs confirmation in future research, the article offers rare insights into how third parties participate in interest-based negotiation.