Reith's job plan:
CHEAP LABOUR

Last week Workplace Relations Minister Peter Reith's secret strategy on 
employment was leaked to the media. In it Reith proposes "one big wave" of 
change to overhaul the "labour market" from top to bottom. The document is 
a strategy to crucify workers and trade unions and turn Australia into a 
low wage paradise for exploitation by business, big and small.

This so-called jobs plan is about giving employers more power and 
flexibility, and increasing the exploitation of workers who still have a 
job. Its aims are to reduce wages and working conditions, deunionise 
workplaces and cut back social security. 

In fact, it is a recipe for unemployment. It contains not a single job 
creation measure.

It advocates the removal or winding back of the structures and regulations 
that currently give workers some limited protection. The Howard Government 
knows that legally binding award wages and conditions, union-negotiated 
agreements and arbitration tribunals are barriers to the unfettered 
operations of private enterprise.

The Government's ultimate goal is the complete deregulation of the "labour 
market" with workers losing access to protection from awards and tribunals.

At present it wants to take further measures to deny unions the right to 
bargain on behalf of their members and completely remove protections from 
the least organised section of workers — casuals and small business 
employees.

Reith proposes:

* "increasing labour market flexibility" — meaning employers free to do 
what they like to workers;
* "establishing a single simplified benchmark award for the no disadvantage 
test for agreement making" — a new and far lower minimum standard;
* "further award simplification" — stripping back and lowering what 
remains in awards even further so that minimum conditions of "simplified" 
awards would be extremely "simple" and absolutely minimal;
*  lower minimum wages;
*  employers to be able to by-pass awards;
*  casuals to lose existing protections;
*  small businesses to be exempt from unfair dismissal laws and award 
provisions.

Attack on union rights

Reith talks of  "constraining union abuse of bargaining periods and access 
to protected industrial action, introducing secret ballots ..."

In other words, to curb or to remove the very limited legal rights unions 
have to take industrial action under his Workplace Relations Act.

He goes on to talk about "devolving more power away from industrial 
tribunals to workplaces and external mediators, simplifying access to non-
union bargaining, strengthening compliance and freedom of association laws 
and ameliorating pattern bargaining."

These measures are aimed at excluding the union, protecting scabs, and 
giving employers more power, with workers left to fend for themselves on a 
one-to-one basis with the employer, without the protection of an award, 
tribunal or union.

Reith quite bluntly says in the document that one of its aims is "reduced 
union power".

Lower wages

The plan proposes that Living Wage cases, instead of being determined 
directly by the Australian Industrial Relations Commission, could be 
determined by a "panel" comprising, in addition to the AIRC, members of the 
Productivity Commission, the Reserve Bank and/or Treasury.

With such a collection of big business lackies, it would become a question 
of wage reductions, not increases.

Reith proudly says that his measures "could help address key labour cost 
constraints on business including a more concerted move away from penalty 
rates and other on-costs".

This is an admission that workers' total pay will be reduced by the removal 
of basic entitlements such as penalty rates, holiday loadings and sick 
leave.

Reith proposes that wages in regional areas could also be "discounted" — a 
"rural wage" — and re-affirms his commitment to "junior pay rates based on 
age".

These facts belie Howard's claim that "no worker will be worse off", a 
claim Reith re-asserted when he finally released the draft to the media.

Exploiting the unemployed

Reith's plan talks of "exempting the long term unemployed for a defined 
period from the unfair dismissal provisions" if they do get a job.

It proposes that small business would be able to recruit labour from the 
ranks of the long-term unemployed (Reith defines "long term" as more than 
six months) on a rate below the award "safety net".

So in addition to a "youth wage" there would be a "rural wage" and a "dole 
wage".

Exemption from the unfair dismissal laws would allow employers to sack 
these low paid workers before they had to pay full wages.

This is a plan for a reserve labour pool, providing cheap labour to compete 
with workers on a full wage and help keep real wages down.

In order to provide "incentives" for the unemployed to take these low-wage 
jobs, the Government would increase work-for-the-dole-type obligations on 
them and make receipt of their allowances conditional on their fulfilling 
these obligations:

"The Mutual Obligation approach could be applied to all adults once their 
receipt of allowance extends beyond, say, six months. I have in mind that 
beyond this duration, continued receipt of allowance could be conditional 
on the recipient being engaged in useful education activity, community 
service or other workplace activity."

There would be no dole for a long-term unemployed person who knocks back a 
low-wage job under appalling conditions.

This is Reith's jobs plan.

The sum total of Reith's plan is to provide cheap, "flexible" labour for 
employers.

Reith's document hints that the deregulation agenda could go further in the 
future. It refers to proposals by economist Des Moore who he says argues 
for "total labour market deregulation" and "abolition of minimum wages".

Reith is not against these proposals but concedes that at this time they 
are "well ahead of Government policy". He does remark, however, that they 
are "a useful talking point for discussions".

Reith emphasises the need to "sell" the plan and "garner the necessary 
support" with "effective marketing to the media and wider community".

He suggests there should be an inquiry — a sham investigation — that 
would put the issues in the media. Such an inquiry would need "to be 
carefully managed through the selection of chairman and giving it 
appropriate terms of reference", he says.

Reith also proposes options for getting the legislation passed. One of 
these includes increasing the quota required for election to the Senate in 
order to exclude smaller parties from the Senate.

If that is done then the legislation could be implemented during a third 
term in office, says Reith.

If the Government gets its way the short, and long, term outlook is higher 
unemployment.