Doing things differently: IR practice and research beyond 2020

We are delighted to present this Special Issue of Labour and Industry: A Journal of the Social and Economic Relations of Work, focussed on the Association for Industrial Relations Academics, Australia and New Zealand (AIRAANZ) 2020 conference. Little did we know when we gathered in Queenstown at the beginning of 2020 what the year ahead would hold for us all. Shortly after our conference, COVID-19 became the focus of our lives. Life as we knew it changed significantly, and few of us will have since attended an international conference such as this. It is therefore with both pleasure and sadness that we use this editorial as an opportunity to reflect on the conference, the themes which emerged and how these have played out in 2020.

We were fortunate to have the beautiful backdrop of Lake Wakatipu for our 2020 conference. The networking opportunities and time to reflect were magnified by the breathtaking views from the windows of the conference venue. Reflecting on 2020, it was also opportune that the conference took place in early February (11–14). Less than 1 month later, attendees of the World Hereford Conference in Queenstown were exposed to what we now know was a significant threat – the COVID-19 pandemic. We consider ourselves extremely fortunate that our gathering did not subject our community to any risks to health and well-being, whilst also acknowledging the lives lost in Australia, New Zealand and globally.

In retrospect, the AIRAANZ conference theme, Doing things differently? IR practice and research beyond 2020, was particularly apt. As academics and practitioners, we have been faced with closed universities and workplaces, online learning (and teaching for those with children) becoming the norm, research streams being interrupted, and overseas research and study leave being cancelled. As individuals, we have also experienced considerable personal concern and stress for our families and our students, both at home and abroad. This situation has created challenges as well as opportunities for the academic community which was an unwitting, but key, theme in the Conference’s presidential address.

The overarching theme throughout the conference, and which permeates the selected papers, addresses equity. This was reflected in issues such as ongoing inequalities in the labour market and economy, both locally and internationally; the inherent and prevalent challenges associated with addressing global and local social inequities; and the intersectionality and dynamism of equity issues. Indeed, gender continues to feature as a key dimension in a number of these contributions, but timely attention is also devoted to other worker and workplace characteristics including ethnicity, migrant status and precarious work. We also heard the frustration of the union movement who want to see widespread change in and beyond the workplace but are struggling to have significant influence. The widespread pertinence of these concerns, mediated by national and local circumstances, is further emphasised by the inclusion in this Special Issue of country-specific analyses of Australia, New Zealand and Japan, as well as inquiries into trans-national phenomena.

The first of the conference contributions included in this Special Issue, in acknowledging an increasingly tumultuous context, focuses on an array of interrelated social justice imperatives. Julie Douglas's (2021, this issue) presidential address denotes the centrality of labour, employment relationships and the employment setting in these matters. Despite the eclectic character of much industrial relations research, she argues that academics are morally bound, on account of the impact of their research on workplace stakeholders, to voice the concerns of those who are traditionally not heard (e.g. women, youth, those of colour, immigrants, older workers, members of the rainbow community, etc.), many of whom have experienced relatively more adverse impacts of the pandemic (e.g. Baird and Hill 2020; Murat Yildirim and Elsen-Ziya 2020; Borjas and Cassidy 2020). Her address traces some key legislative developments in New Zealand aimed at improving the situation of such worker groups, while also observing that not only is more effort needed, these efforts need to be coordinated. Although not mentioned specifically in this address, the relevance of this sentiment is currently being played out with the Equal Pay Amendment Act in New Zealand, effective from 9 November 2020. While a milestone in the country’s regulatory progress, the efficacy and application of its provisions to bring about pay equity and finally close the gender pay gap in Aotearoa remain untested, but will no doubt be closely scrutinised.

Douglas’s address also emphasises the need to look beyond our borders to recognise and respond to global labour inequities – inequities to which our business models and societal views have likely contributed. As far as the employment relationship is concerned, she calls for us to jolt ourselves from a torpor that threatens the existence of our natural world and the quality of life in the working world, while at the same time acknowledging our best efforts alongside of the empirically informed breadth of advice received from agencies like the ILO which covers matters ranging from international trade arrangements through to local workplace initiatives. In the closing section of her address, Douglas segues to the key role AIRAANZ might play via IR research in countering the exigencies of workplace and wider systems of excess. We expect that the impact of COVID-19 and the resulting economic inequalities in the employment relationship will be a key theme of future conferences, and urge academics to share their research on this phenomena, giving consideration to what we might learn for IR practice in the future.

Alongside the presidential address, we present an edited transcript of the address by one of our keynote speakers, as well as three papers presented at the AIRAANZ Conference in 2020.

We listened with intent to the exceptional keynote given by Laila Harré (2021, this issue) from UnionAID, who led us on a journey through the potential implications for labour rights from the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), involving New Zealand and 10 other countries. Harré’s address made it clear that the CPTPP is not a panacea for improvements in the treatment of workers across participating nations. Although, on the surface, the CPTPP presents an opportunity to improve workers’ rights, she suggests that previous inertia in writing the rules to support this in other trade agreements will likely also occur in this one; the result will be little effectual change. In highlighting further weaknesses, Harré cited not only the length of time it takes to process labour violations cases but also the CPTPP’s use of the over-arching gauge that the violation does not ‘affect trade between the two countries’.

Exploring the Partnership’s potential implications for New Zealand labour laws, Harré provided examples of where local labour laws could potentially be at odds with discussions between the government of the day and overseas investors, citing the example of the Hobbit film production in New Zealand. This negative implication would likely be tolerated through notions of proportionality and reasonableness. On reading this address, it would seem that the CPTPP (and similar agreements), theoretically at least, open the door for overseas investors to contest the fairness of the wage subsidy provided by the New Zealand (and many other) governments throughout COVID-19. This situation could provide New Zealand industry with an unfair advantage over its trading partners and, while unlikely, it is important that possible implications of the CPTPP for national IR systems are understood.

In the first article in the Special Issue, Douglas and McGhee (2021, this issue) tackle the role of unions in New Zealand’s response to the climate change crisis, surveying union members on their expectations and interviewing senior union leaders. They identify underlying tensions, including the competing demands of traditional union work, job security and improving wages and conditions for members, with the need to respond to bigger social issues such as the impact of climate change on jobs, the economy and human existence. They also suggest a misalignment between what union members thought the unions should be doing and whether this would be effective. The authors then explain these tensions by applying theoretical frameworks such as efficacy theory, espoused theory, and systems justification theory. Although union members broadly advocate for a union role in addressing climate change, they do not see union capacity as having an adequate influence in this sphere. This is compounded by senior union leaders appearing to prioritise pressing issues such as wage, job and condition security. COVID19 is likely to underscore this focus, at least in the short term, as unions provide a voice for those negatively impacted by job losses, under-employment and weaker working conditions. Another explanation points to the abstract nature of climate changes, and the inability to see the direct influence on work and workers. Although the climate strikes in early 2020, the New Zealand government’s declaration of a climate change emergency and heightened awareness of the positive impact of working from home on carbon emissions experienced during COVID-19 (draft Advice for Consultation from He Pou a Rangi Climate Change Commission advocates for flexible working arrangements to support reducing long-lived greenhouse gases, to work towards decarbonisation and meet the ‘vision of a thriving, climate resilient and low emissions Aotearoa’, 2021, 9) might encourage a shift in attitude towards climate change campaigning, particularly among the younger working population, who have the most to lose in the long run due to climate degradation. Significantly, will this translate into their becoming (active) union members, demanding more from their unions and the union movement, reflecting the translation of the challenges from the last year into an opportunity?

In the Australian context, the second article from Faaliyat et al.’s (2021, this issue) examines employment incongruity and gender among Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) skilled migrants. Their paper presents a much-needed investigation into the labour market experiences of MENA skilled migrants in Australia. By specifically looking at women, their article takes an intersectional approach, focussing on power, and identifies key issues for these skilled migrants in securing employment congruent with their qualifications and experience. It is timely qualitative research, offering insights into the labour market experience of a significant yet under-researched group. By refining Syed and Murray’s (2009) theoretical model of intersectionality, the authors focus on power and highlight its links with segmented labour market theory. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the authors show that while many MENA skilled migrants experience a range of discriminatory practices, particularly at the organisation level, this disadvantage is most keenly felt by women in this migrant group.

Looking forward, the advent of COVID-19 has closed Australia and New Zealand’s borders to many of these workers – both those already with working visas and those yet to apply. This demarcation in the employment relationship may lead to further gaps in the way in which skilled migrants from MENA countries are treated by employers. The need to address workplace discriminatory practices is critical if the Australian and New Zealand economies are to best utilise the skills and experience that they bring to the country, for example, through the government’s development of specific skilled visa categories.

The third and final article in this Special Issue is Tyler's (2021, this issue) candid and thought-provoking article on labour rights. It draws on feminist perspectives to consider the positioning of labour rights policy for prostitution and sex work. Momentum for the promotion of ‘decent’ work has been correspondingly supported by arguments for labelling some work ‘unacceptable’ (e.g. International Labour Organisation, 2015). Tyler’s paper initially overviews feminist debates and relevant nomenclature to highlight how prostitution and sex work have generally come to be seen as forms of either violence against women or legitimised labour. In doing so gender is afforded consideration as Tyler then analyses the nature of sex work using McCann and Fudge’s (2017) 12 substantive dimensions of unacceptability. From this analysis, Tyler concludes that, at a minimum, there is some justification for considering this work unacceptable and, consequentially, abolition as a potential policy position. Scholars and policymakers alike will undoubtedly enjoy reading this paper which affords an interesting and informative read, with a highlight being the innovative insights provided on the future policy positioning of sex industry work. For these reasons, this paper is available via free access for a period of 3 months from publication. The paper can be accessed via Taylor and Francis Online, located on the Labour and Industry: a journal of social and economic relations of work homepage.

The subject foci and research approaches of the papers in this Special Issue thus demonstrate the extent to which the 2020 AIRAANZ conference’s main theme now resonates in much IR scholarship. Rapidly changing workplace and wider circumstances due to the COVID-19 pandemic, inter alia, reinforce the need for inquiry that sheds light on dynamic workplace and societal challenges, and on the precarious yet often under-reported circumstances in which workers and workplaces find themselves. Themes arising in this special issue such as the ability of nations to regulate their IR systems in a global context, and the role that migrant workers play in national labour markets are more than ever apparent in the ongoing global pandemic. COVID-19 has highlighted the inequalities in the way that migrants are treated, especially in Australasia where borders are closed to all but citizens and permanent residents, which a few, select migrant workers allowed entry. While we are yet to see how global competition and co-operation play out with regards to employment protections, we have evidenced the way in which both can hinder and help our international community through the debates and co-operation on the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines. The legacy and ongoing nature of the pandemic re-emphasise the long-term need for theoretically- and empirically informed research that has regard for the sheer complexity of the world of work, and its meaningful impact on work practice.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).