New bill to end the AWA's

[flyhardmo]

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=300253AWA

bill in parliament in 2008: Gillard
Sunday Dec 2 12:05 AEDT
One of the first acts of the new Labor government next year will be to introduce legislation ending Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) but unfair dismissal laws will remain unchanged until perhaps mid-year.

Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard said a transition bill would go to cabinet before Christmas and be presented to the opening of parliament next year, ending the ability of employers to make AWAs.

But she conceded a second substantial piece of legislation reinstating unfair dismissal laws, delivering on the rest of Labor's election promise, would take longer.

"We will get that into the parliament as soon as it can be done. Obviously we want to draft it in a consultative way including having an exposure draft so that will take a number of months," she told Network Ten on Sunday.


"People should anticipate seeing that in the parliament in the first half of next year."

Ms Gillard, whose portfolios include minister for employment and workplace relations, said Labor could not undo all of the harm of Work Choices overnight.

"We need to legislate for change. We want to legislate in a careful and measured way," she said


"We want to get the legislation right. The last thing we want to do with the substantial piece of legislation is do what the Howard government did with Work Choices, which is draft it poorly and amend it again and again and again.

"We want to get it right first time and take the time necessary to do that. But from that piece of legislation on, Work Choices will be over."

New Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson warned last week the coalition would not simply roll over on Work Choices.

"We will not support legislation or policy which undermines the employment prospects of everyday Australians," he said. "It is extremely important that we have and we support an environment that continues to see jobs grow."

Ms Gillard said the coalition needed to be reminded that the people have spoken.

"We would be saying to the Liberal Party and to the National Party that the Australian people have spoken and they have asked for a fair and balanced industrial relations system," she said.

"This wasn't a marginal part of the last election campaign. It was a key part of the election campaign. We'd ask for the will of the Australian people to be honoured."

Ms Gillard said the head of the Workplace Authority Barbara Bennett would have a job for some time yet.

"The Workplace Authority still has work to do," she said.

"In fact it has 140,000 Australian Workplace Agreements in a ginormous pile to get through. The authority will have to do that.

"It has a role to play also in our transition plan. Of course from 2010 we want to create a one-stop shop in Fair Work Australia."

Meanwhile, Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson says he's got the message on the former government's unpopular Work Choices policy loud and clear.

He said Work Choices played a major role in losing the election for the coalition.

But Dr Nelson said that didn't mean the opposition would roll over and back government moves to get rid of AWAs and reinstate unfair dismissal laws.

He said the opposition wanted to see government legislation before it made up its mind.

"I will wait until we have a look at the legislation," he told ABC television.

"We know there are a number of lessons from the election. One of them is a significant number of Australians chose to vote for Mr Rudd on the basis of what they understood Work Choices was about.

"I have got that message. We have got the message.

"We also think it is very important that we don't do anything to reduce the chance of any of our kids or any of us being able to get a job or keep a job."

Work Choices was perhaps the crucial issue in attracting support for Labor during the election campaign.

Dr Nelson said there would clearly have to be a significant discussion with parliamentary colleagues before the opposition adopted any position.

He denied he was having a bet each way.

Asked if he accepted the incoming government had a definite mandate to repeal Work Choices, he replied: "I will not use that expression in relation to a number of issues.

"I do believe very strongly that one of the key reasons there was a change of government, apart from longevity of our government ... was Work Choices."

Dr Nelson said he was not prepared to commit the opposition to any position on Work Choices before seeing the government's legislation.

"But I can assure you the message has been received and we will be examining it very carefully before we do anything precipitate as far as job security is concerned," he said.

Meanwhile, Workplace Ombudsman Nicholas Wilson has warned employers not to pressure workers into signing AWAs ahead of their abolition by the incoming Labor government.

Telstra has been named among a host of employers seeking to get staff onto the controversial contracts before Prime Minister-elect Kevin Rudd introduces laws next year stopping the signing of new AWAs and phasing out existing ones.

"Placing undue pressure on a worker to sign an AWA is unfair, utterly unlawful and will not be tolerated," Mr Wilson said in a statement.

"The community expects that workers will be treated fairly and employers are warned that the Workplace Ombudsman will not hesitate to prosecute those who apply or attempt to apply such pressure on workers."

The Workplace Ombudsman has successfully prosecuted two cases in which employers placed duress on their staff to sign AWAs.

Another nine cases involving alleged duress are currently in train.

Mr Wilson urged employees who felt they were being unduly pressured into signing an AWA to contact the Workplace Ombudsman's office.


Maybe this government will actually keep their promise. Would be interesting if they pull it off. :D

[Howard Hughes]

Unless of course you can get an AWA that has better conditions than your peers!;)

[lowerlobe]

That indicates more about your worth to the company that you work for than it does about the legislation.


.....Or perhaps an employer that does not want to recognise an employee's value...

It has never been legal to place duress on workers to sign an AWA. If dismissed they would be protected by the unlawful dismissal laws in Workchoices. Something many people seem unaware of - which is not suprising given the crap served up by ACTU advertising.

..I think the operative word about your quote PAF is crap....

[lowerlobe]

PAF....

Take a breath and try to remember last weekend.

Howard moved out of the Lodge after he was walloped in the election....

In the boxes the removalists took away to be shredded were the work choices paper work and AWA's....

[lowerlobe]

PAF....I think your quote of only 1% of AWA's failing the fairness test is about accurate as the promise that there would never be a GST under a Liberal government led by John Howard.Now if you can't get that part right why do you think that the majority of Australians voted to get rid of Howard....

JOHN Howard's industrial laws were branded a shambles last night, with the revelation that half of all wage deals checked by the Coalition's workplace watchdog have failed the "fairness test" and been sent back to employers for correction.

The Workplace Authority confirmed 26,833 agreements had been knocked back for failing to comply with minimum standards since the Prime Minister introduced the fairness test in May.

Once deals are rejected, employers have 14 days to fix problems or have them permanently cancelled, with employees entitled to backpay.

Figures released yesterday by Workplace Authority chief Barbara Bennett show an enormous backlog of 142,000 individual and collective wage agreements - almost 80 per cent of all those lodged - are still waiting to be fully checked.

The high number of wage deals either rejected or awaiting checks comes amid complaints from employers that the Government's fairness test has become a bureaucratic nightmare.

Mr Howard announced the fairness test in May to quell concerns that under his Work Choices laws, workers could have their penalty rates and other conditions traded away with nothing in return.

Previously, all Australian Workplace Agreements and collective wage deals were checked only if employees lodged a complaint.

The test requires that all agreements must be vetted by the Workplace Authority to ensure employees receive penalty rates or equivalent compensation before they can be approved.

Figures released by Ms Bennett yesterday show that since May, 49.2 per cent of 54,436 wage agreements ruled to be subject to the Government's fairness test have not met requirements and have been sent back to employers.

The figures released yesterday come a month after Ms Bennett revealed she had issued a blanket ruling to fail 25,000 wage agreements because employers had received "a reasonable window" to submit them.

Unions seized on the latest figures last night, declaring they showed the Howard Government's fairness test had failed workers.

[lowerlobe]

PAF...
What about the nearly 50% of AWA's failing the fairness test......and you are still trying to sell them...:yuk:

[Air Ace]

There is nothing inherently wrong with the concept of an AWAs, provided the legislative frame work exists to protect minimum conditions and exclude employee exploitation – something the previous Government should have included in the original WorkChoices legislation.

Many years ago Labour mounted a campaign against John Hewson’s GST – which Labour promptly introduced when in Government.

The Unions successfully mounted a fear campaign around AWAs and WorkChoices. I suspect AWAs, under another name and with legislative employee protected minimum conditions, will remain. What is the alternative – an archaic Award system that has long since passed it’s use by date?

Already the Government is allowing AWAs to remain for the WA mining industry and employees earning over $75,000 per annum – and how many airline pilots earn less than $75,000 per annum?

I wouldn’t be holding your breath waiting for an Australian Utopia with increased wages, lower interest rates, reduced taxation and lower living costs.

[Air Ace]

"What about the nearly 50% of AWA's failing the fairness test..."

Where on earth did that piece of poppycock propaganda come from??? :confused: :confused:

The October monthly report (http://www.oea.gov.au/graphics.asp?showdoc=/NEWS/2007/news_071109.asp) shows that:
* 29,089 agreements were lodged in October;
* 181,915 agreements have been actioned out of the 183,203 lodged since the introduction of the Fairness Test;
* 66,070 key decisions have been made informing employers and employees about whether their agreements are subject to the Fairness Test and whether the agreement meets the requirements of the Fairness Test;
* 27,603 agreements in total have passed the Fairness Test, with 90% passing without the need for any changes;
* 1,826 agreements in total have ceased to operate. Ceased agreements are referred to the Workplace Ombudsman to ensure that employees receive any back pay they are entitled to.

1,826 AWA's, approximately 1%, failed to meet the Fairness Test.

Far more than 1% of Australian workers did not receive their full entitlements under the previous Award system!!!

[lowerlobe]

Where on earth did that piece of poppycock propaganda come from???


....You guy's really need to get out more often.

My quote came from the Australian..a small newspaper you might see if you go into any newspaper shop in the country...

It quotes figures from Workplace Authority chief Barbara Bennett....start reading guy's....

[The PM]

Many years ago Labour mounted a campaign against John Hewson’s GST – which Labour promptly introduced when in Government.


Air ace, which Labor government introduced the GST? Or did Little Johnnie change sides and tell no one, then switch back again?

[Air Ace]

Yes, my error, my apologies. PAF is correct - originally a Keating concept, proposed by Hewson.

No chance PM Rudd will revoke that little earner. But can he be trusted not to increase the GST, even on selected goods and services? :=

[Zhaadum]

I have had personal experience in being pressured subtly to sign an AWA. The consequences of not signing were not stated overtly but it was clear that no AWA = no job. We were all asked to return the signed AWA's asap, but at the same time told "no pressure, take your time".:yuk:

Z.:ok:

[womble006]

Being an aviation refugee from Australia , who has a dream of returning one day . My Question is this ! With the labour laws now being ( rolled back ) better, a world wide pilot shortage . Proof is I may be offred > % 20 to stay in a company hemeraging pilots , why cant we lift our game in Australia for a better future. Its never going to be better than now to get a better deal , if we get smart.

[ozbiggles]

Z, PPRUNE would be pretty boring if there were not people with a different point of view to express.
Its when people attack the player it gets silly...

And if your refering to people who have been in the ADF as a sheltered workshop fine....just remember right now a few of them are getting shot at for a living....does that seem sheltered to you?


Z, PPRUNE would be pretty boring if there were not people with a different point of view to express.

Its when people attack the player it gets silly...

Could not put it better myself!!! :ok:

Tail Wheel

[Air Ace]

I signed an AWA - willingly - as did 95% of the staff at my employer's company!

Best employment deal and highest wage I ever had! :ok:

[Jamair]

I recently signed an Agreement that has me and my work colleagues about $10K better off than the 'award'. Would hate to see some union bully-boys have it withdrawn and us end up back on minimum GA wage.....:yuk:

[Track Coastal]

An Air Force Officer who works in the penultimate nil accountability closed shop (been there done that, worn the uniform) lecturing those who work (battle?) for companies driven by profit and management bonuses, in turn driven by keeping costs (those pesky workers and their needs). Howard's utopia - its over.

Couldn't even retain his seat.:D:E:ok:

You do understand that the election was for which local member you wanted to represent you in parliament?
No. We wanted the rodent out and a return to a society not an economy.

Turnbull gave a glimmer but the right wing inmates in the asylum voted accordingly.

PS How can we have jet drivers on less than 100k a year on international routes, during a pilot shortage?

recently signed an Agreement that has me and my work colleagues about $10K better off than the 'award'

A pilot shortage where airline's are parking aircraft and 10% is getting you excited?

[maxter]

quote..Air Ace..."Many years ago Labour mounted a campaign against John Hewson’s GST – which Labour promptly introduced when in Government."

Air ace is your information re AWA's as accurate as your GST statement? I can assure you Labor did not introduce the GST. John Howard did after making the famous statement of never ever introducing a GST.

Re AWA's It is illegal to force someone to sign one if already employed but a different story if they apply for a job. Ask the 20 year old girl at the gym I am associated with. She left a 'chain gym' to work there only to get a lawyers letter pointing out that buried in the detail of the AWA she signed was a clause stating she cannot work in any other gym within a 250k radius of a 'chain gym'. Outrageous behavior from the chain. How many 18 year olds look for that type of detail or should be expected too?

You may well ask about the fact that my teenage kids worked for a popular food chain and were payed to the exact minute of any time finished before roster end but would not get paid for any time worked after roster end. I was prepared to take this up with the thief of an owner but was persuaded not to by my kids as when complaints were made by others they just stopped giving them shifts. I can document a number of other instances of what I call exploitation by employers.

I repeat what I have said in earlier posts I am an employer with 250 plus staff working in various businesses so this is not just employer bashing.

Workchoices was a great principle if the world is perfect. Unfortunately it is also full of people willing to exploit others for their own greed. This applies to
employees as well as employers.

Anyway the election is over and Rudd & co will make changes as outlined in their policies and I am confident that all will be well in 3 years time. If not they will get a very short term at the top. It will be interesting to review these election threads and see what actually happened, at the next election.

[Air Ace]

Maxter

quote..Air Ace..."Many years ago Labour mounted a campaign against John Hewson’s GST – which Labour promptly introduced when in Government."

I acknowledged my failing memory:

Yes, my error, my apologies. PAF is correct - originally a Keating concept, proposed by Hewson.

You may well ask about the fact that my teenage kids worked for a popular food chain and were payed to the exact minute of any time finished before roster end but would not get paid for any time worked after roster end. I was prepared to take this up with the thief of an owner but was persuaded not to by my kids as when complaints were made by others they just stopped giving them shifts. I can document a number of other instances of what I call exploitation by employers.

Are you suggesting this is exclusively a product of WorkChoices and never happened under the previous antiquated Award system?????? :confused:

Workchoices was a great principle if the world is perfect. Unfortunately it is also full of people willing to exploit others for their own greed. This applies to employees as well as employers.

Second and third sentence: Are you suggesting this is exclusively a product of WorkChoices and never happened under the previous antiquated Award system?????? :confused:

Anyway the election is over and Rudd & co will make changes as outlined in their policies and I am confident that all will be well in 3 years time. If not they will get a very short term at the top.

In that we agree!! :ok:

[lowerlobe]

PAF and Air-Ace....

AWA's are great 'IF'.......you have something to bargain with.

With the boom in the mining industry plus the fact that not everyone wants to work in a remote area in those conditions then those who do will be able to dictate their terms and conditions from a stronger position.

With the pilot shortage a pilot would be able to negotiate a better package than if there was a surplus of pilots.

Not ever group within society has that advantage and so collective bargaining still has an overall advantage.

My quote was from the Australian newspaper regarding the fairness test.I don't think that anyone has ever described the Australian as an ACTU propaganda unit.

The figures released were from the head of the work choices department.

Howard had to bring in the fairness test to alleviate concerns that AWA's could be less beneficial than the employee's previous award.The fact is that nearly half of the AWA's failed Howards test....

If there was no attempt by some employers to make the most of WorkChoices then there would have been no need for a fairness test.....

[spider331]

Workchoices was a great principle if the world is perfect. Unfortunately it is also full of people willing to exploit others for their own greed.

Maxter - Never a truer set of words spoken in my book.

From many sources both inside an outside of aviation circles, I've lost count of the number of times I have heard that employers have used the work choices to divide and conquer staff or drive down conditions. Some of the examples are pure ridiculous (cant work for another gym within 250km!, sign this AWA quickly and you will get a cash sweetener, if you dont sign the AWA - no command etc. etc..)

Lets face it, If you wanted the job, you had to sign the AWA or.... catch you later. That's all there is (was) too it. All this talk of negotiating an individual contract with a new employee. It might apply to key positions, but for the mainstream I havent heard of anyone starting a new job in aviation and being able to bargain their own conditions in an interview!

I, for one, am glad that the country voted for a change.

[019360]

I was offered an AWA once in a letter signed by the then Labor PM Hawke. Letter slid under my door at some horrible hour. If you looked at it hard I would have made buckets of money. But it did involve having to leave my union and cross a picket line. So didn't even think about it.
However the ACTU and all members of the Labor government fully supported this. Makes you wonder about the word "Hypocrisy" doesn't it?
Safe flying

[lowerlobe]

PAF is a military driver isn't he?

If this is the case I doubt the miliary have AWA's.....then again perhaps he has left and is an accountant...He might have an AWA there....or maybe a PR guy for Howard.....yep definitely an AWA then...or was....

[maxter]

Air Ace I am not suggesting that there were not people willing to exploit pre workchoice, in fact I am saying the opposite. My point was that to reduce the bargaining power of those that already have none, as per workchoice, allows the exploiters even more free go at thievery. There are also some very good employers that offer well above award conditions in AWA's and they should be recognised. Mind you there was already the ability to offer above award conditions in the previous system and many employers chose to reward the good or loyal employees this way.

I would have no hesitation in myself negotiating an AWA. I have the experience and understanding of contracts for a start. My 19 year-old son is a different matter. They have already been exploited and the door was opened to enlarge on that, with workchoices. The debacle of the last minute panic to put in place a 'fairness commission' to oversee AWA's just highlights the fact. If it was so good why did the Liberal government rush that in just as an election was comming up.

P-A-F the reverse of your argument re employment can also be argued. I believe it is absolute drivel to claim all the 400,000 jobs, or what ever was the figure, was workchoice. 99.99% of new jobs created was the world-wide economic boom that is happening, feeding into our economy.

[ozbiggles]

To take Maxters point on seeing this thread in 3 years, for the record then

Current unemployment - 4.3%
Inflation - 1.9% in last 6 months (can't find the yearly on the ABS site, too tired)
Average weekely earning - up 5.2% for males, 4.8% for fembots (again, too late to figure out a $ value) over 2007.
Cost of Kyoto fines - 2007 = zero, 2008 - ? ask the kiwis how they are going!
Number of troops in Iraq - Too late, will edit tomorrow
Tax cuts - Got one every year for awhile now.
Budget surplus - Stand to be corrected but 10 out of 11?
Number of RPT airlines in oz (after all this is a Aviation site!).
How happy people are - Content, bored, try anything once.
Hospital waiting lists - Apparently not good, but thats why I pay for insurance.
Milk 1L $l.45- supermarket brand
Bread -
petrol - 129.0 here
Cash rate - 6.75%?

I hope for the best....

[max1]

I've stated this on another thread, but for PAF , Ozbiggles and co. Time to climb out of the armchair and put your money where your mouth is. If you see Australia going down the gurgler in the next three years, you can still make a killing on the markets in futures contracts.
Ozbiggles you've started the 'time capsule' with todays stats, howabout letting us know what stocks you are going long and short on over the next 1-2-3 years and we can track your crystal ball. PAF, sorry mate no motherhood statements . You rant on about your economic understanding, Whats down in the future. Take a position, and let us know.

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

With regards to the young girl and the "not to work at a gym within 250km's" AWA.

When she ceased employment with the previous organisation, the AWA became void, i.e there is no longer a legally binding contract between the employee and previous employer.

Therefore, Mr and Mrs previous employer can kiss my well informed a55, is the appropriate response.

[dodgybrothers]

if thats the case then, bonds become null and void when and employee leaves the fold? Unfortunately these intstruments are common law contracts and are binding for the period of the contract.

Just like if the employee leaves and the AWA has a bond included in it, the contract is binding. Insidious things especially now the employers are going for longer terms until julia stops them early next year.

[Torres]

A bond is deferred payment for goods or services provided by an employer to an employee, at the employee's request and on termination of employment would become a civil debt.

The future employment restriction - not to work for another gym within 250 kms - is a restrictive employment practice and would not be approved in an AWA by the OEA.

What Left Handed Rock Thrower said........

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Dodgybrothers,

The Bond is a whole other can of worms.

Generally the Bond and the AWA are seperate contracts, i.e the AWA and an offer letter, the AWA covers the conditions of employment, the offer letter covers the muscle for bonding.

That said, a bond really is a hand shake arrangement between two parties.

The bond issue has hit the courts twice that i'm aware of, please gents correct me if i am misinformed, from what i understand both were with Cobham/NJS/SA,

1) Pilot ( Mclellan? - SA Dash 8 ), won the case on an appeal,
2) Pilot ( not sure - ? ), won the case outright.

I believe it was deemed in these cases that it is illegal to bond to a job etc etc, the links to these case were on pprune some time ago, frankly i could not be bothered finding them.

Do not know what legislation has changed since these cases.

Irrespective of the "whole bond issue", it is easy to get a bad bad name by not honouring a bond, very hard to lose that bad name.

[Capt Kremin]

Now that the 787 is delayed till after AWA's will be made unlawful, does anyone have any idea how Jetstar are going to crew their 787's?

[ozbiggles]

Max, if i knew how to play the stockmarket I wouldn't have time for PPRUNE I'd be off on my latest trip!
I'm actually hopeful for the future, I just don't believe there is to much wrong at the moment. I actually do believe that most people have never been better off!
I find it interesting when people complain they can't afford thier Foxtel, mobile phone bills, playstation 3, laptop, ipod, digital video camera, phone bill, 22 foot plasma screen and home loan oh and then there is their 8 credit card bills....
IF the new PM can run his agenda then we should all be OK. But he can't be a one man team and there isn't much behind him. As I write this the news is saying how Garret has been gagged from talking about climate change!
Also the debacle that is the Libs in QLD to be balanced!
But onto the topic of AWAs the best suggestion I've heard is to allow people over x dollars to be allowed to negotiate a AWA. Its just that pilots have already dug ourselves a hole its going to be very hard to ever get out of

[Gateway Customer]

Im sitting on top of a AWA that my future employer wants me to sign ASAP

What can be done now after the election is over to enable myself to get the right deal.

Is there a cut off date when AWA's will be invalid?
Who would be the best people to call and get the right current advise?

Any help, suggestions would be appreciated

GC

[lowerlobe]

Having an employer want you to sign an AWA is a bit like your employer telling you that they have a new superannuation plan mark XII for you.

When you ask what was the matter with the old super scheme they tell that the new one is a lot better but the reality is that it is better for the employer.

If the employer is in a hurry for you to sign it get legal advice as Coral said....No one in their right mind would sign any contract without legal advice...

[Torres]

Faye's Mate from the Gateway. They can't "want" you to sign it.

Either:

1. You are an existing employee and signing the AWA is at your sole discretion; or

2. You are a new employee in which case you have no option, either sign or no job.

If an existing employee, your employer should tell you the option to an AWA, which will probably be the Award. It should be a simple task for you to assess which industrial framework best suits you.

Regardless of all the ill informed commentary, AWAs are generally more rewarding and beneficial to the employee, than the outdated traditional Award structure.

If you need advice, contact the Workplace Authority (http://www.oea.gov.au/).

[lowerlobe]

Regardless of all the ill informed commentary, AWAs are generally more rewarding and beneficial to the employee,

.....That's why so many AWA's are failing the fairness test that Howard brought in to appease the critics.....

That's why employers like them so much because they are better for the employee.....:E

[Jet_A_Knight]

Ridiculous restraint periods and ridiculous restraint areas are really beneficial to the employee too, aren't they.:rolleyes:

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Dodgybrothers, it's a slow Saturday, here are those Bond cases:

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/FCAFC/2005/46.html

http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/cth/federal_ct/2007/957.html