Watt mandate? Business hits back at Workplace Relations Minister

Workplace Relations Minister Murray Watt has dismissed calls from corporate Australia for a roll back of its contentious industrial relations overhaul, deepening the division between business and Labor.

Workplace Relations Minister Murray Watt at the National Press Club in Canberra on Wednesday. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Workplace Relations Minister Murray Watt has ruled out changes to Labor’s union-backed industrial relations laws to help repair souring relations with business, claiming the government secured a mandate for its agenda at the last election and many ­employers had benefited from the reforms.

Leading business groups ­rejected Senator Watt’s mandate claim, with Jim Chalmers having declared before the election that multi-employer bargaining was “not part of our policy”.

A day after Anthony Albanese used a conciliatory tone in a speech to business leaders disgruntled with the direction of Labor’s industrial relations agenda, Senator Watt on Wednesday declared the government would not change any of its laws in an ­effort to rebuild trust with corporate Australia.

“We’re not looking at backing down on the industrial relations laws that we’ve introduced and that we took to the last election, and that are delivering secure jobs, better-paid, safer workplaces, more co-operative workplaces, and benefits for employers as well,” he said.

“I acknowledge that there are some employer groups and some employers who don’t support some of the changes we’ve made. They didn’t support them before the election either; they didn’t support them when they were going through parliament.”

While refusing to water down Labor’s reforms, Senator Watt said a review of the government’s workplace laws would be ­completed by January, while ­declaring he would take a new ­industrial relations agenda to the next election.

When asked if Labor would be transparent about its plans given the Prime Minister did not take multi-employer bargaining to the last election, Senator Watt said: “Governments always take items to an election and then deliver extra things after they are elected.”

Despite all major business groups hitting out at Labor’s industrial relations agenda, Senator Watt said the reforms were “not all doom and gloom” for employers, saying productivity was up and industrial action down.

“Sure, there are some employer groups and some employers who are unhappy,” he said. “There are a hell of a lot of ­others who are getting out there forming agreements cooperatively, yielding better productivity, yielding better flexibility, hanging on to staff in a really tight ­labour market. So it is not all one way.”

Since coming to office, the Albanese government has delivered a string of controversial amendments to the workplace regime including a regulatory clampdown on labour hire, opening up the gig economy to minimum pay and conditions, and criminalising wage theft. While these changes had been foreshadowed prior to the election, Labor provided scant details of their practical implementation.

Other IR changes, including multi-employer and intractable bargaining, the right to disconnect and delegates’ rights, had not been previously proposed.

Minerals Council chief executive Tania Constable said it was “simply not correct” for the government to claim its IR reforms were the result of an election-granted mandate, accusing the government of harbouring a “hidden agenda”.

“Prior to the election it expressly ruled out compulsory multi-employer bargaining,” Ms Constable said. “Then, when it introduced it, we were promised it would not capture competing coal mine businesses, yet that is exactly what happened in the very first case.”

Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief executive Andrew McKellar said it was a “stretch” for Senator Watt to claim the government had a mandate for its reforms.

“There was a lack of detail in many of the commitments they elaborated before the election,” Mr McKellar said. “They certainly did not have a mandate to make it harder for people to employ Australians or destroy productivity.”

Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said Labor’s pre-election industrial ­relations policy “amounted to eight dot points grabbed from a union wish list and a promise to work it out later”.

“It was notable for its complete lack of transparency and precision,” Mr Willox said.

Commonwealth Bank chief executive Matt Comyn said both business and government had an obligation to “hold the sensible middle ground that has supported Australian prosperity throughout history”.

“That middle ground is characterised by evidence-based reasoning in the policy reform debate and an obligation on the part of businesses to treat their customers well and to help the government of the day maintain Australian success by contributing to appropriate reforms,” Mr Comyn said.

Additional reporting: David Ross