LauraC

Because of the upcoming election I'm wondering what the heck are workchoices? I do know the Liberals like it and that Labor want to get rid of it and about 50% of the general population are not impressed with it. Most of what I've found on the internet are political parties bashing each other or it's just not understandable at all. Can someone please explain it as plainly as possible.

Thanks

themerlin

lol good question

Unions (and so labor) hate it because it takes away there power, unions spent a lot of money on a scare campaign so most of the general public don't like it even though lots are better off or unaffected

Under the old system wages where done using awards so Mr x gets so much pay because he worked so many years, doesn't matter how good he is.

Under the new system Mr x negotiates his pay on a one on one basis so gets paid depends on how good he is, how hard he works etc.

LauraC

Thanks, that makes sense and seems like a fair way of paying people.

Is there anything else to Workchoices or is that it?

pendleman

A tad simplistic I think?

Mr x often gets paid less than newcomers because he'll accept it, and everyone is eroded over time usually anyway.
The new system has no negotiating value unless you're in a true commanding position (ie highly skilled and rare as hens teeth). The only real option under WorkChoices is to accept it or walk (for most). The statistics have been suppressed as to whether it meets basic fairness tests. WorkChoices look very good on paper from an employers perspective.
Its not all bad news for the employee though as it may force more to become more mobile the therefore realise better potential over time. This is a real worry to many employers as it will cause quality of service issues.

We've yet to see who it will really benefit and hurt in the long run?

Gibbo

Put simply, Work Choices is what it says. People now have the CHOICE of negotiating their wages with their employer or having a Union do it for them. Labor wants to infer that people have no choice. If they are elected they will take away choices and people will have to depend on the Unions whether they want to or not.

rabsody

If a business employs up to a 100 employees they are exempt from unfair dismissal laws, so basically they can sack you for whatever reason, no warning, nothing.

There were stories, and I can't verify if they are true or not, of companies sacking some of their staff and then offering them casual contracts on a lower hourly rate.

Vash the Stampede

Click here for a detailed explanation of the WorkChoices legislation.

Much is made of the fact that employees "can bargain for a deal directly with their employer". However, this was already possible under the old system (Collective Agreements; Australian Workplace Agreements) and as one poster has mentioned, direct bargaining is usually impossible because the average employee has no bargaining power to start with. (Which is precisely why they turn to the unions).

One significant drawback for employees under WorkChoices is that companies with less than 100 staff are no longer covered under the unfair dismissal laws. So if your boss decides to sack you for any reason, he can do so - and you're basically screwed.

Another issue is the "fairness" test. Under the old legislation, an employer's offer was subject to the "No Disadvantage Test", which ensured that an employee was not offered an agreement which placed him or her at significant disadvantage. These have now been scrapped.

After a blaze of public protest, Howard's government introduced a "fairness test" for WorkChoices, but refused to make it retrospective - so people already given jobs under the old WorkChoices legislation have no right of appeal against their current terms and conditions.

I want Howard to win the election (the thought of KRudd and his cronies in power makes me shudder) and I believe that the unions are still too powerful in Australia. But this does not blind me to the reality that the federal government's IR legislation is far too harsh. WorkChoices should be dropped or significantly revised to ensure that employees get a fair deal.

Vash the Stampede

This has actually happened.

In at least one case (the abattoir fiasco) the workers were reinstated.

But there will be many others who don't get a second chance.

renth

Workchoices is bullshit, it will be gone in a few months though, so unless you are a dodgy employer you have nothing to worry about.

LauraC

Why? I can understand that feeling because of the unfair dismissal. But what else is bad about it?

renth

Friday "You're fired"
Monday "Welcome back to the same job for less money"

Boss "you're working late tonight"
You "I can't I have to look after the kids"
Boss "You're fired"
You "you can't do that"
Boss "Under Work Choices I can"

It is bullshit and fortunately most Aussies think so too which is why J-Ho will be looking for a new job on Monday

Siren & Brian

Who are they going to employ??? Unemployment is so low, bosses are doing what they can to keep good workers not get rid of them, unless they are slackers and deserve to be rid of.

renth

And when the economy stops being so rosy, then what?

Anyway a lot of employers are gladly getting rid of their workers so they can be replaced with cheap overseas labour on 457 visas. Workchoices makes this easy.

moneypenny20

A serious question here. Apart from the abattoir case, how many people KNOW someone who has been treated badly by Work Choices the the IR laws? There is an awful lot of hearsay but the only people I've met either have no issues with it or were fired basically because they were crap at their jobs and whereas in the past the union wouldn't allow them to be fired for being incompetent, now they can be.

Where are ALL these people who have been treated unfairly? And I don't mean the twits they have in the ads.

renth

* a man was dismissed for refusing to work seven days a week because he wanted to spend at least one day every couple of weeks with his family;
* employees accessing their annual leave entitlements are being replaced - employees are becoming fearful of using their annual leave after reports that employees are told by their employers on their last day before leave, during their ‘recreational’ leave or on their first day returning to work that they have been replaced;
* a Brisbane employee who was into her third month of maternity leave was informed by her employer she had resigned
* a man with 3 years service was sacked for taking sick leave which required hospitalisation
* a Mt Gravatt woman had her employment terminated without warning despite having passed work reviews without any problems. The woman has no idea why her employment was terminated.
* a Cairns employee was sacked for taking a sick day after working full time for six months. The employee notified her employer and was terminated several hours later via a text message
* a Rockhampton male employee was presented with a new employment contract and told if he didn’t sign he could look for work elsewhere
* an injured male working as a sales representative on the Gold Coast was dismissed via email on 27 March – the first day the WorkChoices laws came into full force
* a female manager in a North Queensland motel was told by the owner to take on extra maintenance duties or ‘finish up’
* a man with 13 years service was made redundant (without redundancy pay) after refusing to sign an alternative employment contract which took him from a full-time employee to a three day casual employee.

http://www.workplacerights.qld.gov.a...sals/index.htm