IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ecolab/v27y2016i2p164-180.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Productivity Commission and industrial relations reform

Author

Listed:
  • David Peetz

Abstract

This article considers the political economy of the Productivity Commission in industrial relations reform; in particular, its review of the industrial relations framework foreshadowed in 2013 and conducted in 2015. Following a history of the establishment of the Productivity Commission and its predecessor agencies, it argues that the concepts of third-party independence and third-party endorsement are important for understanding the role of the Productivity Commission. A review of the politics of industrial relations reform leads into the central analysis of the political economy of the Productivity Commission’s 2015 inquiry into the Australian workplace relations framework. The concepts of third-party independence and endorsement are applied in analysing some of the inquiry’s key recommendations. The conclusion discusses several difficulties in the political economy of the Productivity Commission and its relationships to government and, indeed, to evidence, when the latter contradicted its mainly liberal market stance.

Suggested Citation

  • David Peetz, 2016. "The Productivity Commission and industrial relations reform," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 27(2), pages 164-180, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ecolab:v:27:y:2016:i:2:p:164-180
    DOI: 10.1177/1035304616649305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1035304616649305
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1035304616649305?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barbara Pocock, 2016. "Holding up half the sky? Women at work in the 21st century," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 27(2), pages 147-163, June.
    2. Productivity Commission, 2009. "Executive Remuneration in Australia," Inquiry Reports, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia, number 49.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mike Pottenger & Andrew Leigh, 2016. "Long-Run Trends in Australian Executive Remuneration: BHP, 1887–2012," Australian Economic History Review, Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 56(1), pages 2-20, March.
    2. Yaowen Shan & Terry Walter, 2016. "Towards a Set of Design Principles for Executive Compensation Contracts," Abacus, Accounting Foundation, University of Sydney, vol. 52(4), pages 619-684, December.
    3. Richard Heaney & Vineet Tawani & John Goodwin, 2010. "Australian CEO Remuneration," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 29(2), pages 109-127, June.
    4. James Borthwick & Aelee Jun & Shiguang Ma, 2020. "Changing board behaviour: The role of the ‘Two Strikes’ rule in improving the efficacy of Australian Say‐on‐Pay," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 60(S1), pages 827-876, April.
    5. Tjasa Bartolj & Nika Murovec & Saso Polanec, 2022. "Reported time allocation and emotional exhaustion during COVID-19 pandemic lockdown in Slovenia," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 33(1), pages 117-137, March.
    6. Roya Taherifar & Mark J. Holmes & Gazi M. Hassan, 2021. "Is performance affected by the CEO-Employee pay gap? Evidence from Australia," Working Papers in Economics 21/14, University of Waikato.
    7. Parker, Jane, & Nemani, Tino. & Arrowsmith, James, & Douglas, Julie & Cooper, Rae & McDonnell, N., 2011. "Comparative study on social dialogue and gender equality in New Zealand, Australia and Fiji," ILO Working Papers 994634123402676, International Labour Organization.
    8. Monem, Reza & Ng, Chew, 2013. "Australia’s ‘two-strikes’ rule and the pay-performance link: Are shareholders judicious?," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 237-254.
    9. Martin Bugeja & Stephanie Fohn & Zoltan Matolcsy & Neil Fargher, 2016. "Determinants of the levels and changes in non-executive director compensation," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 56(3), pages 627-667, September.
    10. Clarkson, Peter M. & Walker, Julie & Nicholls, Shannon, 2011. "Disclosure, shareholder oversight and the pay–performance link," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 47-64.
    11. Beaumont, Stacey & Clarkson, Peter & Tutticci, Irene, 2018. "Identifying lobbying strategies: An analysis of public responses to the Productivity Commission Inquiry into executive remuneration in Australia," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 288-306.
    12. Michaela Rankin, 2010. "Structure and Level of Remuneration Across the Top Executive Team," Australian Accounting Review, CPA Australia, vol. 20(3), pages 241-255, September.
    13. Sutharson Kanapathippillai & Dessalegn Mihret & Shireenjit Johl, 2019. "Remuneration Committees and Attribution Disclosures on Remuneration Decisions: Australian Evidence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(4), pages 1063-1082, September.
    14. Jonathan Pincus, 2014. "Public Choice Theory had Negligible Effect on Australian Microeconomic Policy, 1970s to 2000s," History of Economics Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 82-93, January.
    15. Paul Dalziel, 2019. "Wellbeing economics in public policy: A distinctive Australasian contribution?," The Economic and Labour Relations Review, , vol. 30(4), pages 478-497, December.
    16. Shah, Dhara & Meiklejohn, Ainslie & Spencer, Nancy & Lawrence, Sandra, 2024. "Precariat women’s experiences to undertake an entrepreneurial training program," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    17. repec:ilo:ilowps:463412 is not listed on IDEAS

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Construction industry employment relations; employment relations reform; independent third party policy agencies; industrial relations framework; market liberalism; penalty rates; Productivity Commission; third-party endorsement;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D73 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Bureaucracy; Administrative Processes in Public Organizations; Corruption
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • J51 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Trade Unions: Objectives, Structure, and Effects
    • J53 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Labor-Management Relations; Industrial Jurisprudence
    • J58 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Public Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:ecolab:v:27:y:2016:i:2:p:164-180. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.