This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jan/26/why-unions-are-furious-about-the-blocked-sydney-train-strike
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Why unions are furious about the blocked Sydney train strike | Why unions are furious about the blocked Sydney train strike |
| (about 1 hour later) | |
| Unions fear the erosion of the right to strike or take other industrial action in Australia | Unions fear the erosion of the right to strike or take other industrial action in Australia |
| Paul Karp | Paul Karp |
| Fri 26 Jan 2018 00.47 GMT | Fri 26 Jan 2018 00.47 GMT |
| Last modified on Fri 26 Jan 2018 01.58 GMT | |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| View more sharing options | View more sharing options |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Close | Close |
| The Fair Work Commission’s decision to suspend Sydney’s train strike has unions up in arms about the erosion of the right to strike in Australia. | The Fair Work Commission’s decision to suspend Sydney’s train strike has unions up in arms about the erosion of the right to strike in Australia. |
| While the New South Wales government and some commuters might breathe a sigh of relief, the cancellation of a strike that met all the requirements for protected industrial action will provide fresh impetus to unions’ Change the Rules campaign to strengthen collective bargaining rights. | While the New South Wales government and some commuters might breathe a sigh of relief, the cancellation of a strike that met all the requirements for protected industrial action will provide fresh impetus to unions’ Change the Rules campaign to strengthen collective bargaining rights. |
| On Friday the FWC’s deputy commissioner, Jonathan Hamberger, ordered the suspension of the 24-hour action slated for Monday and the continuing overtime ban, saying it was “threatening to endanger the welfare of part of the population” and “threatening to cause significant damage to the Australian economy or an important part of it”. | On Friday the FWC’s deputy commissioner, Jonathan Hamberger, ordered the suspension of the 24-hour action slated for Monday and the continuing overtime ban, saying it was “threatening to endanger the welfare of part of the population” and “threatening to cause significant damage to the Australian economy or an important part of it”. |
| Those parts of the Fair Work Act are familiar to unions. In the infamous Monash University v National Tertiary Education Union case a full bench suspended protected industrial action because a proposed indefinite ban on submitting students’ assessment results was deemed a threat to student health and welfare by heightening their stress and anxiety. | |
| Given that low bar for threats to welfare was set in 2013, Friday’s decision to suspend the Rail Tram and Bus Union’s proposed strike was no surprise. | Given that low bar for threats to welfare was set in 2013, Friday’s decision to suspend the Rail Tram and Bus Union’s proposed strike was no surprise. |
| On Thursday the secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Sally McManus, declared the right to strike in Australia was “very nearly dead”. | On Thursday the secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, Sally McManus, declared the right to strike in Australia was “very nearly dead”. |
| The Fair Work Act – introduced by the Labor government after Kevin Rudd won the 2007 election with the help of the ACTU’s Your Rights At Work Campaign, and promising to abolish Work Choices – is quite restrictive of the right to strike. | |
| Employees can strike only: | |
| With other employees of the same employer for an agreement to cover that enterprise | With other employees of the same employer for an agreement to cover that enterprise |
| During a bargaining period after the expiry of an old agreement | During a bargaining period after the expiry of an old agreement |
| For rights that can be put into an agreement, not other legal or policy measures even when they directly affect workers | For rights that can be put into an agreement, not other legal or policy measures even when they directly affect workers |
| For their own rights, not in sympathy with other workers through secondary boycotts | For their own rights, not in sympathy with other workers through secondary boycotts |
| In isolation, not through pattern bargaining to achieve common agreements across multiple employers or supply chains | In isolation, not through pattern bargaining to achieve common agreements across multiple employers or supply chains |
| The apparent ease with which employers can have industrial action suspended further curtails the right to strike. | The apparent ease with which employers can have industrial action suspended further curtails the right to strike. |
| Shortly after her elevation to secretary, McManus landed in hot water by suggesting there was no problem breaking “unjust laws” including the rules restricting industrial action. | |
| The impolitic suggestion of breaking the rules has now been replaced by the ACTU campaign to change the rules. | The impolitic suggestion of breaking the rules has now been replaced by the ACTU campaign to change the rules. |
| One of its central thrusts is to allow employees to collectively bargain with their ultimate employer to prevent companies engaging a labour hire company as a means to keep workers on the award or a non-union enterprise agreement. | One of its central thrusts is to allow employees to collectively bargain with their ultimate employer to prevent companies engaging a labour hire company as a means to keep workers on the award or a non-union enterprise agreement. |
| Another problem with collective bargaining identified by the ACTU is the increasing trend of employers applying to terminate expired workplace deals, cutting protections as employees negotiate a replacement agreement. | Another problem with collective bargaining identified by the ACTU is the increasing trend of employers applying to terminate expired workplace deals, cutting protections as employees negotiate a replacement agreement. |
| That tactic emerged after the FWC’s 2015 decision to grant Aurizon’s application to terminate 12 workplace deals. | That tactic emerged after the FWC’s 2015 decision to grant Aurizon’s application to terminate 12 workplace deals. |
| Labor has given some encouragement by promising to tackle so called “sham” agreements in which employers negotiate with an unrepresentative sample of their workforce and to make it harder for employers to terminate their agreements. | Labor has given some encouragement by promising to tackle so called “sham” agreements in which employers negotiate with an unrepresentative sample of their workforce and to make it harder for employers to terminate their agreements. |
| It has also suggested further changes may be in the works to prevent labour hire workers earning less for doing the same work as permanent employees. | It has also suggested further changes may be in the works to prevent labour hire workers earning less for doing the same work as permanent employees. |
| When the Fair Work Act was introduced in 2009 it was supposed to represent something of a settlement: with unions and workers benefiting from the abolition of individual statutory contracts and restoration of unfair dismissal rights; and employers benefiting from the many rules structuring and restricting industrial action. | When the Fair Work Act was introduced in 2009 it was supposed to represent something of a settlement: with unions and workers benefiting from the abolition of individual statutory contracts and restoration of unfair dismissal rights; and employers benefiting from the many rules structuring and restricting industrial action. |
| While the Abbott government flirted with possible changes through a Productivity Commission review of industrial relations, and the Turnbull government has made some piecemeal changes, the act has remained largely unchanged. | While the Abbott government flirted with possible changes through a Productivity Commission review of industrial relations, and the Turnbull government has made some piecemeal changes, the act has remained largely unchanged. |
| But over time the interpretation of the act has eroded the right to strike and the number of collective deals being struck. Even though the settlement was legislated by a Labor government, it is the labour movement that is calling for the pendulum of industrial law to swing back in its favour. | |
| Australian trade unions | Australian trade unions |
| Industrial relations | Industrial relations |
| Australian politics | Australian politics |
| analysis | analysis |
| Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
| Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
| Share via Email | Share via Email |
| Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
| Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
| Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
| Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
| Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
| Reuse this content | Reuse this content |