Christian Porter should give test boot, prioritise policy alternatives

Christian Porter’s contentious bid to allow more employers to bypass the better off overall test is not quite dead on arrival, but it is already on life support.

After months of talks with unions and employers, Porter blindsided the ACTU and gave political ammunition to the ALP by inserting the surprise change into the government’s industrial relations bill.

The proposal to allow COVID-stressed businesses to strike agreements that do not comply with the BOOT was dreamt up by employers.

But its embrace by the Coalition exposes Porter to criticism that workers, already operating in a record low-wage labour market, would be vulnerable to government-sponsored pay cuts.

Questions about the plan swamped Porter’s media conference, and undercut his pitch that the government was committed to “incremental” changes designed to generate jobs.

And based on Porter’s own analysis, all for what? He said he expected the BOOT clause to be “potentially used in a small handful of occasions”.

Existing narrower provisions have been sought about 28 times in the past decade, with 21 successful. Of these, the government says only one related to pay.

It makes little political or policy sense for Porter to die in a ditch over it.

The proposal has distracted attention from the rest of the package which, with a few notable exceptions, appears capable of winning Senate support.

Business and unions agree changes need to be made to the failing enterprise bargaining system which, when working properly, drives agreements that generate higher wages and increased productivity.

Over recent years, the agreement approval process has become too time-consuming and prescriptive, discouraging bargaining and leaving too many workers on the base safety net.

Porter would be advised to ditch the BOOT bypassing proposal and focus on getting the necessary support for other changes, including proposals impacting casuals which are already facing resistance.

The bill is not a return to WorkChoices, but it is the first time since the death of John Howard’s laws the Coalition has tried to make changes that would impact the conditions and pay of workers. The strategy carries enough political risk without persisting with what looks like an ambit claim.