The Federal Government’s plan to establish a unitary industrial relations system has been condemned by the union movement and Labor state governments but, more surprisingly, has gained a mixed response from business groups.
Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Kevin Andrews believes the case for a unitary system is open and shut.
“It is undeniable that having six separate legislative systems is often confusing, complex and costly,” he said in a speech last month.
“The question of whether or not state IR systems are working well fundamentally misses the point.
“In a modern national economy, the mere fact of overlapping state and federal systems is, in and of itself, a significant cause of inefficiency and economic roadblocks.”
Western Australia’s minister for employment and consumer protec-tion, John Kobelke, continues to argue the state’s case.
“Industrial relations laws in WA are clearly superior to the federal industrial relations system,” Mr Kobelke told WA Business News.
He said WA’s system offered less complex mechanisms for a speedy resolution of industrial disputes than the federal system, which was well known for protracted disputes.
Chamber of Commerce and Industry of WA policy director Bruce Williams said the focus should be on fundamental reform of the federal and state systems, both of which were flawed.
“A unitary system isn’t an end in itself,” Mr Williams said.
He said employers are able to ‘opt in’ to the federal system, providing an effective solution for the overlap that can arise.
In practice, he said the vast majority of employers operated under only one system, so for them the whole debate over a unitary system is academic.
Mr Williams said the CCI would like to see the state and federal systems harmonised, so they are ‘all pulling in one direction”.
A similar stance was taken by the Australian Industry Group, which this week released a reform package that envisages a continuing role for the states.
Minter Ellison partner Andrew Burnett said that, once a unitary system was established, a risk was that a future government could introduce a very different industrial relations regime.
Employers would also have less flexibility.
For instance, many employers favoured the state system when it was run by the Court Government in the 1990s, but now they prefer the federal system because of subsequent political and policy changes.
