Posted: April 06, 2006

WorkChoices Round 1!

WorkChoices is now just over a week old and already the fears that a lot of IR commentators (including myself) have raised are proving to have credence. The Corowa dispute demonstrated the first attempted use of the amorphous 'operational reasons' as a basis for dismissal. The problem was that the employers were not told that they could not then offer the dismissed workers their jobs back again at significantly reduced pay and conditions.

An interesting comment came from the head of Australia's Chamber of Commerce, Peter Hendy (reported on ABC news). He said that "thousands of people lost their jobs each week before the new WorkChoices legislation was implemented." And further that "Each week, you know something like 11,000 people lose their jobs, to pick out one or two and say this - and I will say it - 'is the sky falling in', is inaccurate"

Which begs the question: what was the imperative for the unfair dismissal law being abandoned? The answer is obvious: there was no imperative. Which goes for most of the new IR legislation and its raft of regulations.

Blog entry posted by bill