Alex Tighe
Too bad if you happen to be employed in a small business that decides to cut costs by making you redundant. Even worse luck if you have worked there for several years. The Coalition government has displayed its aggressive anti-worker ideology yet again by introducing more new industrial laws into the federal parliament to prevent workers getting a fair go.
On March 26, the full bench of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) handed down a decision about new provisions for workers facing redundancy. The intention was to improve conditions that were originally established under a 1984 Termination Change and Redundancy federal test case.
After hearing swathes of evidence from unions, employer groups, researchers and academics, the AIRC commissioners approved an increase in award entitlements for workers facing redundancy. Previously, when retrenched by a business, workers were entitled to a maximum of eight weeks' pay, regardless of how long they had worked for the employer — although some enterprise agreements may ensure greater payouts. The new decision will take entitlements up to a maximum of 16 weeks pay, where there is 10 years of service.
The controversial aspect of the decision, however, is the removal of an exemption for small business — those with less than 15 employees — that was part of the 1984 decision for federal awards.
Employer groups like the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) and the Australian Industry Group argued that small businesses operated on tight cash flow and could not afford to put aside thousands of dollars. They said that small business would be hindered in necessary restructuring and would employ less people if the exemption was abolished.
Nonetheless, the AIRC determined, on balance, that workers should not be disadvantaged simply because they work for a small business and applied the provision to all employers under federal awards. The commission did, however, retain the maximum of eight weeks' pay for small businesses, rather than the higher amounts. Each state government will need to consider whether this decision has a flow-on effect to its state laws.
Like the spoilt brat in the playground, the Coalition government decided that it didn't like the umpire's decision. Within days, it drafted and introduced new industrial legislation into parliament in an effort to overturn the ruling. The Workplace Relations Amendment (Protecting Small Business Employees) Bill 2004, will exempt small businesses from making redundancy payments. On top of that, the new law also aims to capture workers under state awards by disallowing a flow-on.
The ACCI announced support for the government's new bill on the same day that industrial relations minister Kevin Andrews introduced it into parliament, declaring that "the exemption is necessary to preserve jobs. Recent reports show small business do not have the capacity to access capital."
Apparently missing the irony, the ACCI website contains a May 2004 newsletter titled "Small business: Running strongly with a tail wind". It points out that results from ACCI's recent survey "indicates unambiguously that small businesses are travelling well in the current economic cycle".
The survey cites business taxes and charges as the number one constraint and availability of suitably qualified employees as the second factor constraining investment. Wages only kick in as the third concern.
The federal Labor Party and the Greens have announced that they will oppose the new legislation. The Australian Democrats, however, are wavering about sending the matter off to a Senate inquiry. According to Democrats Senator Andrew Bartlett, it is "a complex issue" to balance the needs of small business against those for employees. This was the same attitude that led the Democrats to support the Workplace Relations Act in 1996 and many retrograde changes ever since.
From Green Left Weekly, June 9, 2004.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.