WorkChoices, ImageChoices and the marketing of new industrial relations legislation

This article takes a critical discourse approach to one aspect of the Australian WorkChoices industrial relations legislation: the government’s major advertisement published in national newspapers in late 2005 and released simultaneously as a 16-page booklet. This strategic move was the initial stage of one of the largest ‘information’ campaigns ever mounted by an Australian government, costing more than $AUD137 million. This article analyse the semiotic (visual and graphic) elements of the advertisement to uncover what these elements contribute to the message, particularly through their construction of both an image of the legislation and a portrayal of the Australian worker. We argue for the need to fuse approaches from critical discourse studies and social semiotics to deepen understanding of industrial relations phenomena such as the ‘hard sell’ to win the hearts and minds of citizens regarding unpopular new legislation.

Revisiting Industrial Relations

In 1999 I convened Industrial Relations, the annual ADSA Conference hosted by QUT in Brisbane. This event was promoted as ‘a conference exploring the links between theatre scholarship and professional theatre practice’. As well as academics, there was to be substantial representation by ‘industry professionals’, although interest from the latter category turned out to be modest. One day of the conference was designated a special ‘Links with Industry’ day, during which the Association launched its now defunct ADSAIL (ADSA Industry Links) initiative. Keynote speaker Wesley Enoch commented on ‘the very strong resistance in “the industry” to acknowledging any role of academics’. ‘What is the practical role of having them?’ he asked the ‘them’ gathered before him. In a letter declining our invitation to speak (he later changed his mind), David Williamson remarked that he always felt ‘uneasy at such conferences’: My view of my work is that I’ve successfully filled theatres for 30 years now, something dramatists are supposed to do. I suppose there’s part of me that hopes this will be celebrated. It often is, but rarely in academic drama departments …. Perhaps in fifty years time someone in academe will realise that I wasn’t just reinforcing the attitudes of the Anglo Celtic ruling class. Several years on it seems timely to revisit Industrial Relations; to look again at the extent to which problems of intercultural communication between industry and academy are being addressed. And what are the implications of this for the ADSA History project, which seeks to investigate ADSA’s contribution to the development of theatre / performance studies in Australasia? What are the ‘external’ impacts of ADSA’s ongoing conference enterprise, and how might these be measured? Reflections from delegates on these and other questions will be warmly encouraged.

Industrial Relations: Proceedings from the 1999 Australasian Drama Studies Association Conference

These papers were presented at “Industrial Relations”, the Australasian Drama Studies Association conference hosted by Theatre & Teaching Studies in the Academy of the Arts, Queensland University of Technology, from the 5th to the 9th of July, 1999. Conference delegates included scholars and artists from across the tertiary education and professional theatre sectors, including, of course, many individuals who work across and between both those worlds. More than a hundred delegates from Australia, New Zealand, England, Belgium and Canada attended the week’s events, which included: • Over sixty conference papers covering a variety of topics from project reports to academy/industry partnerships, theatre history, audience reception studies, health & safety, cultural policy, performance theory, theatre technology and more; • Performances ranging from drama to dance, music and cabaret; • Workshops, panel discussions, forums and interviews; • Keynote addresses from Wesley Enoch, Josette Feral and Keith Johnstone; and • A special “Links with Industry” day, which included the launch of ADSA’s “Links with Industry” brochure, an interview between Mark Radvan and David Williamson, and a panel session featuring Jules Holledge, Zane Trow, Katharine Brisbane, John Kotzas, Gay McAuley and David Watt.

Achieving a responsive industrial relations environment for construction industry workers – a project alliancing case study

This paper outlines how the project agreement operating on the Australian National Museum project in Canberra, Australia facilitated a responsible and responsive workplace environment for construction workers. A project alliancing approach was adopted and designed to encourage industrial relations innovation in the workplace. The trigger for this approach was the perceived success of the alliancing working arrangements between key project delivery teams and a desire to extend this arrangement to subcontractors, suppliers and the workforce. Changes in the Australian workplace relations environment and introduction of a national code of practice for the Australian construction industry provided impetus for reaching a new type of workplace agreement. The workplace culture and characteristics of relationships formed between workers and management on that site shaped the agreed terms and conditions of work. It also spurred the pursuit of innovative approaches to project delivery from a technology, management and workplace culture perspective.

The implications of de‐collectivist industrial relations laws and associated developments for worker health and safety in Australia, 1996–2007

The institutional and regulatory interlinkages between industrial relations (IR) and occupational health and safety (OHS) are seldom explored in the IR literature. This article begins to address this gap by examining regulatory initiatives in Australia during a period of neoliberal government. It examines the laws enacted by the federal government during this period and events and cases arising from these laws that go some way to illustrating their effects. Evidence is also drawn from detailed research on a number of state OHS inspectorates between 2004 and 2006. It is argued that de-collectivist changes to IR laws exacerbated problems posed by the growth of flexible work arrangements and a drop in union density, weakening participatory provisions in OHS laws and promoting work arrangements that undermined OHS standards. The study provides evidence of the implications of a divergence in the trajectory of IR and OHS laws and the importance of better integrating worker protection laws.

Industrial relations in the privatised coal industry: continuity, change and contradictions.

This study seeks both to describe and account for the patterns of industrial relations which have emerged in the UK coal industry since privatisation in 1994. In doing so, it also aims to address some of the wider questions concerning the relationship between ownership and industrial relations. A series of hypotheses are advanced concerning how changes in ownership might affect industrial relations within the industry, and whether such changes would have positive or negative implications for organised labour. A case study approach is utilised to analyse labour relations developments at a number of collieries, and it is shown that the industrial relations strategies adopted by management within the new coal enterprises have had a determining effect upon the patterns of labour relations within the privati sed industry. This study also demonstrates that the emergent pattern of labour relations in the privatised industry is characterised by both continuity and change. However, whilst continuity with the patterns of labour relations established during the final decade of public ownership is shown to have had negative implications for organised labour within the industry, the changes associated with privatisation are demonstrated to have been a more ambivalent force. Change has, in different contexts, had some positive implications for organised labour, but in the majority of cases, the implications for labour have been negative. Overall, therefore, this study concludes that privatisation has had a significant influence upon industrial relations within the coal industry, and that organised labour has been detrimentally affected by these developments.