Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T11:15:58.964Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Award Restructuring: Possibilities and Portents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

David H. Plowman
David H. Plowman*
Affiliation:
Industrial Relations Research Centre, University of New South Wales
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The major focus of contemporary industrial relations is award restructuring. This restructuring, with its potential to facilitate a better skilled, more flexible and more efficient workforce is integrally related to the National Wage determining process and the ACTU-ALP Accord. It is also a key to international competitiveness and the wellbeing of the manufacturing sector. In recent years the wage determination process has attempted to reduce those normative forces which industrial tribunals have institutionalized — in particular comparative wage justice and real wage maintenance. This attempt has created a number of tensions: control versus flexibility; cost of living versus productivity; centralism versus decentralism; paid rates versus minimum rates; supplementary payments versus over award payments; equity versus efficiency. The system’s capacity to resolve these tensions without merely returning to established wage settlement practices will determine the efficacy of the restructuring exercise. It will also shape the contours of industrial relations for the next decade.

Type
Article
Information
The Economic and Labour Relations Review , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , June 1990 , pp. 15 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 1990

References

Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (ACAC) (1986a) National Wage Case Decision, June, Print G3600.Google Scholar
Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (ACAC) (1986b) National Wage Case Decision, December, Print G6400.Google Scholar
Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (ACAC) (1987) National Wage Case Decision, March, Print G6800.Google Scholar
Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission (ACAC) (1988) National Wage Case Decision, August, Print H4000.Google Scholar
Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) (1989a) National Wage Case Decision, February, Print H8200.Google Scholar
Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) (1989b) National Wage Case Decision, August, Print H9100.Google Scholar
Blandy, R., Sloane, J. (1986) The Dynamic Benefits of Labour Market Deregulation, ACC/Westpac Economic Discussion Paper 3, Canberra.Google Scholar
Department of Employment and Industrial Relations (1985) Supplementary Submission to the Committee of Review into Australian Industrial Relations Law and Systems, AGPS, Canberra.Google Scholar
Hancock, K.J. (1975) “The Demise of Australian Wage Policy?”, in Niland, J.R., Isaac, J.E. (eds), Australian Labour Economics: Readings, Sun Books, Melbourne, 1975.Google Scholar
Hawke, G.R. (1986) Labour and Flexibility, Report of the Economic Monitoring Group, Wellington Planning Council, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Plowman, D.H., Niland, J.R. 1990, Administered Wage Flexibility: The Australian Case,’ Bulletin of Comparative Labour Relations. No. 19.Google Scholar
Rimmer, M., (1989) Enterprise and Industry Awards, in Enterprise-Based Bargaining Units: A Better Way of Working, Business Council of Australia, Melbourne.Google Scholar