Australian Council of Trade Unions slam business lobby workplace agenda as 'unfair' and risk to million of Australians

Attempts to axe “significant workplace rights” could affect up to one million workers, Australia’s peak union body says, as industrial relations battlelines are drawn ahead of the looming federal election.

The Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) warns calls by business lobby groups to change the definition of a small business are the latest move to try to take away rights from employees.

Unfair dismissal rights would be significantly reduced if the definition of a small business was increased from 15 employees to 25 in a workplace, the council said.

It said the change would make it harder for workers to convert from a casual job to a permanent one, or to recover unpaid wages under existing exemptions for small businesses in the Fair Work Act.

ACTU Secretary Sally McManus said the council demanded all political parties rule out any reduction to workers’ rights ahead of the election, due to be held in May.

“If the business lobby got their way, this would act as a green light for bad bosses to return to the days when they could hire and fire when they feel like it, without having to give workers a reason for why they are working one day and gone the next,” she said.

“It is unfair to expect workers taking on a new job to be on a compulsory statutory probation period for an entire year ... and without having access to unfair dismissals protections.”

Analysis by economic research centre e61 Institute found the extensive use of non-compete clauses in contracts was associated with lower wages and fewer workers moving between jobs.

One in five Australian workers have non-compete clauses, which stop them from competing with their employer in a similar industry or area for a nominated time after their job finishes up.

Workers at firms that use non-compete clauses extensively were paid four per cent less on average than employees at similar firms that did not use non-compete.

But workers in lower-skilled occupations faced worse outcomes, earning 10 per cent less after five years on the job.

Research manager Ewan Rankin said the clause reduced workers’ power to bargain for higher wages by limiting their future employment options.

“By locking people into jobs that may not be the right fit for them, non-competes may also be damaging economic growth and innovation,” he said.