Abstract
The changing structure of modern business poses challenges for employment regulation in Australia, which has historically relied upon an ‘implicit’ model of corporate social responsibility (CSR) (commonly associated with strong state-mandated protections). Traditionally, such regulation has privileged the direct employment relationship, but the dramatic expansion of insecure and non-standard employment arrangements, encouraged by the proliferation of complex supply chains, raises questions about the ongoing durability of this regulatory model to provide appropriate labour standards for a growing cohort of workers. In an attempt to preserve some semblance of implicit CSR, particularly the centrality of state involvement in determining and enforcing labour standards, some Australian unions have developed strategies to advance new forms of labour regulation. This article examines four such strategies based on the logic of ‘sustainable sourcing’ in the road transport, cleaning, textile clothing and footwear and aged care industries. Although these strategies can be understood as a broader form of implicit CSR transposed onto multiple firms in a supply chain, they represent a notable departure from traditional union regulatory strategies based on the logic of implicit CSR centred on the individual employer.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the editors and the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments on an earlier draft of this article.
Notes
1. While cynics may argue that this is just the latest Orwellian wordplay in the area of Australian labour law (following from the Howard government's Work Choices legislation), provisions of the FWA 2009, such as the Fair Work Principles, illustrate recognition, at least by the Rudd/Gillard Labor governments, that the state has a role to play in the regulation, not only of direct employment relationships, but also within supply chains in relation to the public procurement of goods and services.
2. ‘Safe rates’ means rates of pay high enough to prevent drivers from engaging in risky behaviour whilst at work such as driving excessive hours, at illegal speeds or under the influence of drugs.
3. The union was known as the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union prior to its name change in March 2011.