Regulating supply chains to protect road transport workers: An early assessment of the road safety remuneration tribunal

The Road Safety Remuneration Act 2012 (Cth) (the Act) explicitly enables the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal to make orders that can impose binding requirements on all the participants in the road transport supply chain, including consignors and consignees at the apex the chain, for the pay and safety of both employee and independent contractor drivers. The tribunal is also specifically empowered to make enforceable orders to reduce or remove remuneration related incentives and pressures that contribute to unsafe work practices in the road transport industry. Recently the tribunal handed down its first order. The article considers whether, and the degree to which, the tribunal has been willing to exercise its explicit power to impose enforceable obligations on consignors and consignees — such as large supermarket chains — at the apex of road transport supply chains. It examines the substance and extent of the obligations imposed by the tribunal, including whether the tribunal has exercised the full range of powers vested in it by the Act. We contend that the tribunal’s first order primarily imposes obligations on direct work providers and drivers without making large, powerful consignors and consignees substantively responsible for driver pay and safety. We argue that the tribunal’s first order could have more comprehensively fulfilled the objectives of the Act by more directly addressing the root causes of low pay and poor safety in the road transport industry.

Improving food supply

Improving the availability, accessibility and affordability of healthy food equitably is fundamental to improving nutrition and health. While theoretical models abound, in real world complex systems rarely are there opportunities to address leverage points systematically to improve food supply. This presentation describes efforts over the last 30 years to do just that by remote Australian Aboriginal communities, where a single community store is usually the major dietary source. Areas addressed include store governance and infrastructure, wholesale supply, transport and pricing policies including cross-subsidization. However, while there have been dramatic improvements in the availability, quality and price of fruit, vegetables and most other healthy foods over this time, the proportion of communities' energy intake from energy-dense nutrient-poor foods and drinks has increased. One cause may be the disproportionate increase in supply of unhealthy choices in terms of variety and shelf-space, consistent with changes in the food supply in broader Australia. The impact of changing social and environmental factors, food preferences and price elasticity will also be explored briefly. Clearly much more needs to be done to reduce the high prevalence of diet-related chronic disease in some vulnerable groups. In particular, efforts to continually improve the availability and affordability of healthy food also need to address the predominance of unhealthy choices in the food supply.

Food waste, power, and corporate social responsibility in the Australian food supply chain

By examining corporate social responsibility (CSR) and power within the context of the food supply chain, this paper illustrates how food retailers claim to address food waste while simultaneously setting standards that result in the large-scale rejection of edible food on cosmetic grounds. Specifically, this paper considers the powerful role of food retailers and how they may be considered to be legitimately engaging in socially responsible behaviors to lower food waste, yet implement practices that ultimately contribute to higher levels of food waste elsewhere in the supply chain. Through interviews with key actors in the Australian fresh fruit and vegetable supply chain, we highlight the existence of a legitimacy gap in corporate social responsibility whereby undesirable behaviors are pushed elsewhere in the supply chain. It is argued that the structural power held by Australia’s retail duopoly means that supermarkets are able to claim virtuous and responsible behaviors, despite counter claims from within the fresh food industry that the food supermarkets’ private quality standards mean that fresh food is wasted. We argue that the supermarkets claim CSR kudos for reducing food waste at the expense of other supply chain actors who bear both the economic cost and the moral burden of waste, and that this is a consequence of supermarkets’ remarkable market power in Australia.