ABSTRACT
Employees appear as relatively passive figures in most analyses of the Fair Work Act’s collective agreement-making process because official bargaining representatives negotiating in formal meetings have been the focus of attention. This article re-examines how the Act structures employee participation in the agreement-making process, with a particular focus on the degree or depth of employee input and influence over the agreement’s terms. Drawing on Flanders’ ‘political view of collective bargaining’, the formalistic legal analysis indicates that the Act facilitates different kinds of employee input and influence at different stages of the agreement-making process. The article concludes that employee input through a yes/no vote to be bound by an employer’s proposed agreement is prioritised the Act. While the legitimacy of an agreement is premised on this level of employee input, the Act allows employee influence over the terms and content of an agreement to vary considerably between cases.
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank the editors of the special issue for encouraging me to submit this paper, and the anonymous reviewers on behalf of the journal and the 30th Association of Industrial Relations Academics of Australia and New Zealand conference for their valuable comments.
Notes
1. But see Fox’s (Citation1975) critique that Flanders ignores many non-economic aspects of the Webbs’ analysis.
2. [2009] FWA 1442, [18]–[19], [2010] FWA 2690, [66]–[67].
3. [2010] FWAFB 3510, [30].
4. [2011] FWA 3916, [43].
5. [2016] FWCFB 997.
6. [2010] FWAA 3758, [36], [2010] FWA 2105, [8]–[9], [2012] FWA 1096, [25].
7. [2010] FWA 2105, [8]–[9].
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Kurt Walpole
Kurt Walpole completed his PhD at the University of Sydney. His research interests include all aspects of Australian industrial relations and labour markets, particularly the impacts of government policy.