Employers move against Labor law in row over ‘wage boost’ bid

Employers will mount a joint campaign against imminent changes to workplace laws in a bid to stop federal Labor forcing companies to submit to industry-wide wage deals amid fears the new regime would lead to more strikes and higher costs.

Industry chiefs are warning jobs will be lost if the new workplace laws enforce “multi-employer bargaining”, giving union leaders a trigger to call strike action across entire sectors in a way that is banned under current law.

Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke (right) is calling his plan a “better pay” law. Credit: Alex Ellinghausen

At stake is a pledge from Labor to “get wages moving” by overhauling the workplace regime when Tuesday’s federal budget will confirm a fall in real wages in the year ahead because inflation is eroding salaries.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese went to the election with a promise to boost wages and Employment and Workplace Relations Minister Tony Burke is calling his plan a “better pay” law, setting up a dispute over whether the government or employers should carry the cost of lifting household incomes.

Business Council of Australia chief Jennifer Westacott has hardened her objections to the workplace laws in a push with the Australian Industry Group and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry to gain changes to the bill before it goes to parliament in the coming week.

“We want wages to go up but that won’t be achieved by creating more complexity, more strikes and higher unemployment,” she said.

In a full-day session on Thursday, officials from unions and employer groups were briefed on and allowed to read the “Secure Jobs, Better Pay Bill”, which runs to several hundred pages, as long as they did not take a copy.

With several officials signing agreements not to disclose what they knew, the debate over the reform is yet to engage in crucial details about when many employers might have to negotiate a common enterprise bargaining agreement with a union.

A feature of the bill, according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the legal agreements, is that it sets up separate “streams” for different kinds of employers, but one source said this was already creating confusion.

One of the government’s stated objectives is to improve wages in sectors such as childcare and aged care where many of the workers are women, salaries are low compared to other sectors and many employers receive federal assistance.

Business Council of Australia chief Jennifer Westacott has hardened her objections to the workplace laws.Credit: Oscar Colman

These employers would be placed in a stream with tougher obligations compared to industries that did not rely so heavily on direct or indirect federal funding.

Burke has left room to amend the draft bill after feedback from industry and unions and a likely Senate inquiry once it is introduced to parliament.

“They always result in various amendments to what’s put forward,” he said of the consultations.

“So there’s ongoing revision that occurs in this process and then after it’s been introduced, you go through the normal Senate inquiry process as well.”

As well as the industry-wide bargaining changes, the bill aims to ban pay secrecy clauses so companies cannot prohibit staff from talking about their pay, make gender equity an objective of the Fair Work Act, establish new “expert panels” at the Fair Work Commission to address the gender pay gap, and give the commission more authority to order pay increases for workers in sectors dominated by female workers.

ACTU secretary Sally McManus put the multi-employer bargaining idea on the agenda on August 24 with a warning about the “simmering anger” among workers who had seen their incomes fall in real terms for years, leading to a debate about the reform at the government’s jobs summit.

While business groups took different approaches at first, with ACCI and Ai Group more vigorous in their objections than the BCA, the groups are uniting with a joint statement on Saturday to express “deep reservations” at the multi-employer bargaining changes.

“Any broader system of multi-employer bargaining must be voluntary and cannot lead to another layer of ill-suited, industry-wide terms and conditions,” the three groups will say.

Ai Group chief Innes Willox says the changes in their current form will cost jobs by making conditions more difficult for employers.Credit: Jeremy Piper

“The global economy is treading a precarious and perilous path. It’s critical we avoid any changes that could result in increased industrial action, supply chain bottlenecks and unsustainable wage pressures.”

ACCI chief Andrew McKellar cited recent downgrades in global growth as a reason for caution.

“Undermining genuine workplace agreements and increasing the scope for aggressive industrial action are a recipe for disaster with deteriorating international conditions,” he said.

Ai Group chief Innes Willox also said the changes in their current form would cost jobs by making conditions more difficult for employers.

“We urge the government to take a breath and avoid rushing to introduce such extreme changes to our workplace relations system,” he said.

An ACTU spokesman hit back at the industry groups and said the union movement would work with the government to get wages growing after a decade of low wage growth.

“It’s disappointing that employer groups don’t want to be part of the process of fixing wage growth, but perhaps unsurprising. They have stopped wage rises for over a decade and would like to keep it that way,” he said.

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis from Jacqueline Maley. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter here.