Work Choice defence based on abuse not facts

If Mr. Howard is re-elected he will believe that he has a mandate to go further with the previously unmandated Workchoices.

The original version of Work Choices was unfair especially to low income earners.

This has been admitted by the Howard Government by the belated introduction of a "fairness test".

Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations Hockey has been required to maintain the pretence that Work Choices is and always has been beyond criticism against a multitude of academic studies.

Hockey's argument has not been at the level of contesting facts and figures, but rather has attacked the character of these authors with bluster and abusiveness .

Hockey has stated that their findings are instantly dismissed as biased and without credibility.

It would be an unenviable job, being required to defend the indefensible.

In response to a study by academics at Sydney University's Workplace Research Centre which found that workers on AWA's tended to be paid significantly less than workers on collective agreements both Hockey and Costello opted for abuse rather than argument.

Research paid for by vested interests can't be regarded as "independent".

Last month's report from the Workplace Research Centre was a major peer-reviewed research program that, against the stiffest competition and close scrutiny had won funding as an Australian Research Council "linkage project".

Linkage projects are specifically designed to encourage collaborations between university and industry.

In other words, half the projects funding is coming from the Federal Government.

Federal Education Minister Julie Bishop previously stated: "When an independent organisation invests in an ARC-supported research program, it can be confident that it is committing its hard earned dollars not only to a worthwhile project, but to a project undertaken by some of Australia's best researchers."

The Australia@Work research project Hockey and Costello so unthinkingly trashed as a big deal is a valuable and all too rare longitudinal study, tracking the work experience of more than 8000 workers for five years, at an estimated total cost of $2.4 million.

The latest trick for Workplace Authority chief Barbara Bennett was writing to researchers in recent months denying access to samples of people's individual AWA contracts citing privacy. Access to information is a fundamental principle in industrial relations.

Ms. Bennett's predecessor, Peter McIlwain, gave evidence to a Senate committee last year that 40 per cent of Workchoices AWA's stripped entitlements to public holidays; 52 per cent reduced shift loadings and 63 per cent cut penalty rates.

The unmandated Workchoices is eroding into protections for working people.

As Workchoices advertising to date has hit $121 million, working Australians who have been disadvantaged by these laws, are also the taxpayers who have been ripped off by these ads.

The appendix of the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook (MYEFO) details that $66 million has been spent on the second wave of Work Choices advertising since earlier this year.

The fairness test only served to remind Australians how unfair his laws were.

ACTU figures recently released show Workchoices worsens women's pay gap.

The Government's unfair laws have particularly hurt women.

AWA contracts with women on AWAs only earning 81 cents for every dollar earned by men, women on collective agreements faring better, earning 90 cents for every dollar earned by men.

Teenage workers on AWAs are over 20 per cent worse off, then those on collective agreements.

John Howard sends us back to the future pre-1830s and on towards feudalism.

In a democracy, it's your vote that counts.

In feudalism, it's your Count that votes.

Mike Hudson Umina Beach