The Neoliberal State, Trade Unions and Collective Bargaining in Australia

Abstract

For nearly 12 years from 1996, the Australian government pursued a neoliberal industrial relations agenda, seeking to break with structures based on collective bargaining and trade unions. In the name of choice and deregulation, this agenda involved unique levels of state intervention and prescription - and anti-unionism. In the last round of legislative change, the 2005 laws badged as Work Choices, the government overreached itself and in 2007 was defeated in a general election. As in the UK after Thatcher, the extent to which collective bargaining can be restored and trade unions regain a voice is problematical. Copyright (c) Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2008.

Thinking through the Pilbara

“…FIFO labour has undermined labour activism (Cooper & Ellem 2008, 2011. Whereas mining towns are classic spaces enabling unionisation (Hudson & Sadler 1986;Herod 2001;Mitchell 2011), FIFO construction and mining workers are hired as non-unionised independent contractors on AWAs, enabling management 'to more easily control the shift start-times, and further maximise productivity through the use of individualised and decentralised bargaining' (Haslam McKenzie 2010, p. 368).…”

The Changing Fortunes of a Policy Entrepreneur: The Case of Ross Garnaut

“…The close ties between the Australian Labor Party (ALP) and the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) which had been most visible in the 'Accord' were instrumental in limiting opposition to the proposed reforms. This outcome is all the more remarkable given the ACTU and organized labour were more powerful forces then than now, when membership, reputation and influence have declined significantly (Cooper 2008). …”

Ideas that work: mobilizing Australian workers using a discourse of rights

“…The decline in the power and influence of trade unions in developed economies has been widely acknowledged in the academic literature (Frege and Kelly 2003;Heery, Kelly and Waddington 2003;Johnson and Jarley 2004;de Turberville 2007;Cooper and Ellem 2008;Peetz and Pocock 2009;Heery 2011). For example, union density in Australia has declined sharply in the 1990s falling from 41% in 1990s to 25% in 2000, and while there have been some periods and areas of growth, overall union density in 2010 was down to 18% (Cooper and Ellem 2011).…”

“…The discursive and rhetorical aspects of the Howard (Cooper and Ellem 2008, p. 532), the legislation was to have 'major consequences for unions, workers and workplace institutions they relied on' (Wilson and Spies-Butcher 2011, p. s309). Briefly, WorkChoices made it easier for employers to dismiss workers, removed the protection for existing workers from changes in legislation, modified arrangements for setting minimum standards towards more market levels for wages and conditions of work, transferred responsibility for overseeing collective arrangements to a new workplace authority (which was seen to be much less independent of the Government), and significantly curtailed union activity and access in the workplace (Ainsworth et al 2006;Stewart 2006;Cooper and Ellem 2008;Wilson and Spies-Butcher 2011;Woodward 2010). …”