| |
Mediation in
Industrial Relations
According to Boulle (2005, p. 286), conciliation and ADR began
in industrial relations in Australia long before the arrival
of the modern ADR movement. One of the first statutes passed
by the Commonwealth parliament was the Conciliation and
Arbitration Act 1904 (Cth). This allowed the Federal
Government to pass laws on conciliation and arbitration for
the prevention and settlement of industrial disputes extending
beyond the limits of any one state. In Australian industrial
relations, conciliation has been the most prominently used
form of ADR, and is generally far removed from modern
mediation.
Significant changes in state policy concerning Australian
industrial relations took place over the decade 1996 to 2007.
The Howard government, with the introduction of the Workplace
Relations Act 1996 (Cth), sought to shift the industrial
system away from a collectivist approach, where unions and the
AIRC had strong roles, to a more decentralized system of
individual bargaining between employers and employees (Bamber
et al., 2000, p. 43). The WRA Act 1996 (Cth) diminished the
traditional role of the AIRC by placing the responsibility of
resolving disputes at the enterprise level (Boulle, 2005,
p. 287). This allowed mediation to be used to resolve
industrial relations disputes instead of the traditionally
used conciliation.
The new ‘Work Choices’ Amendment came into effect in March
2006, and included a compulsory model dispute-resolution
process that doesn’t involve the AIRC. Mediation and other ADR
processes have been encouraged by the government as a better
option than the services provided by the AIRC. The government
has realized the benefits of mediation to include the
following (Van Gramberg, 2006, p. 11):
-
Mediation is cost saving
-
Avoids polarization of parties
-
Is educative
-
Probes wider issues than the formal court system
-
Provides greater access to justice
-
Gives disputants more control over the dispute process
|
|