1001EHR Employment Relations|
Assignment Two: The state should stay out of the employment relationship. Critically discuss| |
Peiyao NIU (s2838788)|
Tutor’s Name: Gabby DanielsTutorial Time: 20:00-20:50 Monday|
The employment relationship may be defined as the relationship between employer and employee over the terms and conditions of employment (Loudoun, Mcphail & Wilkinson 2009). In Australia, the industrial relations had become a big issue, so “following the 24 November 2007 Federal election, the Rudd Labor Government began work on its promises to re-shape Australia’s industrial relations system.” (Riley & Sheldon 2008) However, some people think that the state should stay out the employment relationship. This essay will argue that the state should stay in the employment relationship because it makes the roles and has the rights and responsibilities for the employee and employer in working environment. The state is an influential actor in employment relations (Bray 2012). It protects the employee and employer, set industrial disputes, establishes the health and safety standards, the minimum wages and maximum working hours. There is a large body of statute law (legislation) that regulates employment relations in Australia at both the federal and state level (Bray 2012). Such as Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and Sex Discrimination Act1984 for anti-discrimination, Common Law and Statute Law for the occupational health and safety (OHS). The main apparatuses of the state for employment relations are state and federal government departments, agencies, tribunals and courts (Loudoun, Mcphail & Wilkinson 2009). At federal level, the functions of a number of existing agencies and tribunals will be brought together in 2010 under one body known as ‘Fair Work Australia’ (Loudoun, Mcphail & Wilkinson 2009). Also there are some other organisations like Australian Industrial Registry, Work Choices, and National Employment Standards and so on. This essay will analyse two key arguments to explain why the state should stay in the employment relationship. Firstly, this essay will argue this topic from the issue of discrimination in Australia including age discrimination, sex discrimination racial discrimination and so on. In the case of Australia, comprehensive, albeit fragmented, anti-discrimination legislation has been enacted which prohibits the use a wide range of criteria in any and all aspects of employment decision-making, including recruitment, selection, training, compensation and separation (Bennington & Wein 2000). Secondly, this essay will provide the support of occupational health and safety (OHS) to prove the state should stay in the employment relationship. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, a work related injury survey indicated a 53 out of every 1000 workers had experience some kind of injury or illness in the workplace (Alice 2012). Overall, this essay will make a conclusion; combine these two main points to argue that the state should stay in the employment relationship.
Norris (as cited in Loudoun, Mcphail & Wilkinson, 2009, p.225) states that discrimination occurs where members of one group of people are denied opportunities to develop their capabilities and denied equal rewards for equal capabilities. In Australia, there are several kinds of discrimination such as age, gender, racial and disability. For these discriminations, the state enacted a range of anti-discrimination legislations which are supported by the federal Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC) such as Age Discrimination Act 2004, Sex Discrimination Act 1984, Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and Disability Discrimination Act 1992. Age stereotyping appears to affect older people, whose situation receives much less attention than the problem of youth unemployment (Encel 1999). In Australia, age discrimination in working environment is alive and well. Research by Macdermott...