This becomes even more pertinent given the championships were all finalised on Labour Weekend when we celebrate the achievement of the eight-hour working day and 40-hour week. Farming is a perfect example of how that system probably never fitted the practice.
A small business with low staff numbers, or a service-related enterprise such as in health, a demand-driven service, or seasonal work relating to processing or animal health, are all examples where a fixed work period, with fixed breaks, and conditions may not work.
Usually these conditions are negotiated on site as and when required or are well known and accepted within the industry. If the job will be finished at 3.30pm, staff may well be happy to push on through smoko and knock off early rather than take a break and finish later. If there are shorter numbers on the hospital ward and there is an incident to deal with, then a meal break may come later than usual.
Funnily enough, the fact that the vast majority of employers work by reasonable consensus slips right past the union movement, which continually contests that workers get shafted every which-way in search of the mighty dollar. The fact that until the current legislation before the Parliament which allows for more flexibility, the ability to enforce all breaks, leave the negotiation table and withdraw labour was all in the hands of the worker was unfair in itself.
The over-riding principle of "good faith bargaining" remained solidly a test by the workers collective rather than the employer.
No doubt the Employment Relations Amendment Bill will be the cause of much angst over the near future. Lines will be drawn politically and along worker and employer lines.
The Opposition will fight any change regardless of the myriad changes to employment conditions, new occupations, work environments and prospects.
Yet the act is called the "Employment Relations Act" and good workplace relations are what we all want.
