The Fair Work Bill seeks to return to a collective system of bargaining by drawing the unions into negotiations they might not otherwise be involved in.

I have previously written that I thought Julia Gillard's Fair Work Bill may not be as bad as many employers feared. I was wrong again.

The bill as presented to the Senate recently is a cop to the union movement which gives too much potential power to the unions. In particular it seeks, in its current form to give union officials the right to enter any workplace, where they have coverage of the industry, and demand to inspect employment records.

Now this is not just about inspecting the records of their members, but those of all employees. The question surely arises, how does the union, have the right to inspect – and then one assumes – make judgments and demands on an employer in respect of employees they (the union) do not legitimately represent?

In the past, there have been government agencies who have the responsibility to investigate any alleged breaches of wages and conditions. Any breaches, if unable to be resolved by immediate negotiation, are referred to the appropriate court or industrial tribunal.

It has always been thus. Why should it change now?

Particularly as the unions represent less than 25 per cent of workers across the country. I should hasten to add that I am not against unions and union representation. I could hardly be so when I worked for industrially registered employer organizations for nearly 20 years.

But I have seen the abuses of power when some union officials are given almost limited powers of entry – particularly in the construction industry. Unfortunately, the Rudd government is, with this bill, doing exactly what it accused the Howard government of doing. Going too far.

Just as Work Choices went too far in taking away the rights of employees, the Fair Work Bill goes too far the other way and seeks to return to a collective system of bargaining by dealing the unions into negotiations they
might not otherwise be involved – such as where they don't have membership.

Then there is the reintroduction of unfair dismissal legislation, virtually abolished by the Howard government. When the unfair dismissal provisions were originally introduced a decade or more ago, the unions, plaintiff lawyers and employee advocates quickly worked out that almost any dismissal might qualify as unfair, particularly if the employer made a commercial decision to "pay the problem out". And this is precisely what happened. Such was the influx of unfair dismissal claims that retired members of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission were brought back to assist the newly formed Industrial Relations Court deal with the backlog of cases.

It became a great little earner for all involved in the process. Not so good for the employer who had probably never been dragged into the "unfairs" (as it become known) system.

"Make an offer" employers were urged – a couple of grand will get you out of this foreign territory. Countless employees – who had no case to present – were sent on their way with a bonus!

I remember well when trying to set a date for some negotiation or hearing advocates from union or employer organisations would consult their diaries and inevitably "I've got an unfair on" would be the response.

The above scenario occurred 15 years ago. Any fair minded person does not want to see employees unfairly treated – and Work Choices gave bad employers the means to do just that. But, by going back 15 years with the current proposed legislation we will be revisiting the past – with the same outcomes. And, from the employer side of the fence my observations are that during the Howard government years, many employers and employer organisations wound down their industrial relations capacity. An old colleague of mine says to me regularly
"Doug, the employers don't have any IR capacity any more."

Throw that scenario into this proposed legislation and there is a recipe for workplace relations disaster.
Look forward to interesting times in the workplace. Oh, and by the way, we have a recession. - Doug Huett.