Abstract

Traditionally, industrial relations in Australia have been governed by a dual system of federal and State regulation. In recent decades there have been two attempts to create a single national system of industrial relations regulation. In 1973, the Whitlam (Australian Labor Party) government proposed two constitutional alteration referendum questions to give the federal parliament plenary law making powers over `prices' and `incomes', and consequently industrial relations. In 2005, the Howard (Liberal—National parties coalition) government used the existing constitutional law making powers of the federal parliament, the corporations power, to widen the coverage of the federal industrial relations system with the Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act 2005 (Cth) to capture about 85 percent of Australian employees. This article compares and contrasts these two efforts to create a national industrial relations system. The analysis shows that both efforts illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of federalism generally and suggests the political nature of industrial relations policy in Australia remain regardless of the regulatory jurisdiction.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.