Traditionally, industrial relations in Australia have been governed by a dual system of federal and State regulation. In recent decades there have been two attempts to create a single national system of industrial relations regulation. In 1973, the Whitlam (Australian Labor Party) government proposed two constitutional alteration referendum questions to give the federal parliament plenary law making powers over 'prices' and 'incomes', and consequently industrial relations. In 2005, the Howard (Liberal-National parties coalition) government used the existing constitutional law making powers of the federal parliament, the corporations power, to widen the coverage of the federal industrial relations system with the Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act 2005 (Cth) to capture about 85 percent of Australian employees. This article compares and contrasts these two efforts to create a national industrial relations system. The analysis shows that both efforts illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of federalism generally and suggests the political nature of industrial relations policy in Australia remain regardless of the regulatory jurisdiction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.