The work-life provisions of the Fair Work Act – A compromise of stakeholder preference

Waterhouse, Jennifer and Colley, Linda (2010) The work-life provisions of the Fair Work Act – A compromise of stakeholder preference. Australian Bulletin of Labour, 36 2: 154-177.

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
Waterhouse_and_Colley_2010_Stakeholders.pdf Waterhouse_and_Colley_2010_Stakeholders.pdf application/pdf 150.43KB 0
uq220360_checklists.pdf HERDC checklist - not publicly available application/pdf 237.72KB 0

Author Waterhouse, Jennifer
Colley, Linda
Title The work-life provisions of the Fair Work Act – A compromise of stakeholder preference
Journal name Australian Bulletin of Labour   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0311-6336
Publication date 2010
Sub-type Article (original research)
Volume 36
Issue 2
Start page 154
End page 177
Total pages 24
Place of publication Adelaide, Australia
Publisher National Institute of Labour Studies
Collection year 2011
Language eng
Abstract This paper adopts a stakeholder analysis approach to policy formulation to consider the Rudd Government's success in achieving its work-life balance goals through the Fair Work Act (FWA), the extent to which it consulted stakeholders and the stakeholders to whom it listened. We explore the stated interests of key stakeholders in the process. We review the legislation, the parliamentary debates, and submissions to the Senate Inquiry into the Fair Work Bill 2008. We also consider the related and simultaneous Productivity Commission enquiry into paid parental leave up until the May 2009 federal budget. The paper concludes that the FWA develops a prescriptive response to work-life balance in establishing National Employment Standards for substantive issues including parental leave, maximum hours of work, paid personal carers' leave, compassionate leave, community service leave and the right to request flexible working arrangements. The Act is less prescriptive, however, in relation to process provisions, in particular the powers of the newly established 'Fair Work Australia' to hear and intercede in disputes regarding work-life balance provisions. There is a lack of clarity about individual flexibility agreements and the assessment of the 'Better Off Overall Test' (BOOT). The weak process provisions represent an uneasy and perhaps unworkable compromise between the competing demands of stakeholders.
Keyword Australia. Fair Work Act 2009
Work-life balance
Industrial relations
Government policy
Flexible work arrangements
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: Institute for Social Science Research - Publications
Official 2011 Collection
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Mon, 15 Nov 2010, 14:12:32 EST by Dr Linda Colley on behalf of Institute for Social Science Research