Enterprise bargaining bad for workers' health

December 12, 1995
Issue 

By Cameron Parker SYDNEY — Enterprise bargaining is subordinating workers' health and safety to increasing corporate profits according to a report released on December 4 by the Australian Centre for Industrial Relations Research and Teaching of the University of Sydney. The report, Is Enterprise Bargaining Good for Your Health?, found that flexible working hours are leading to "unregulated extended working hours and quasi shiftwork-like arrangements without the traditional safeguards". Changes such as multi-skilling, work "intensification", increased working hours and complex rostering systems are leading to greater levels of worker effort and stress, and neglect of workplace health and safety. The study was conducted over two years and reviews overseas and Australian literature, analyses its enterprise bargaining database and other workplace bargaining data, and looks at 12 case studies across seven industries including the waterfront, community services, manufacturing, recycling, finance, construction, and textiles, clothing and footwear. The report, funded by the federal government's peak occupational health and safety body Worksafe Australia, identified several factors which have led to workplace health and safety being subordinated to enterprise bargaining, including:

  • The tendency towards "concession bargaining", where conditions are traded away for wage increases. This has seriously eroded conditions for workers in a weak bargaining positions, often women and people from a non-English speaking backgrounds. In the case of shift, contract and part-time workers — especially in the textile, clothing and footwear industry — there is a tendency towards accepting poorer conditions for job security and small wage rises.
  • State and federal laws on enterprise bargaining do not ensure that workers fully understand the implications of changing work practices, especially in work places with poor levels of literacy, a high number of non-English speaking background workers, and workers on individual contracts.
  • Existing health and safety arrangements are inadequate. Under the 1993 federal Industrial Relations Reform Act as well as the 1988 Act, the Industrial Relations Commission, when certifying enterprise agreements or awards, only needs to take into account — not uphold and enforce — general OHS duties, regulations and standards brought into effect by state and territory governments. Because federal laws and regulations override those of the states and territories, employers can make use of this health and safety loophole.
  • The growth in number of "non-union" enterprise agreements and individual contracts is compromising workers' health and safety because individual workers lack negotiation skills and awareness of OHS implications. However, where a trade union is active, workers are more likely to retain their positive health and safety conditions.

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.