Australian Social Policy- Increased Employee Involvement in Decision-Making - Assignment Example

Australian Social Policy Name Professor Institution Course Date Australian Social Policy 2. What impact have the transformations in paid work had on the organization and operation of the Australian welfare state? Increased employee’ involvement in decision-making A significant debate regarding changes in paid work in Australia and the significance of employees’ participation has been in the media for relatively a longer time; employee involvement and workplace rights in attaining these changes (Lansbury & Davis 1992, p. 232). In the employers' organizations, trade unions have been having a far-reaching consensus concerning the need for better employees’ contribution in issues entailing paid work. The solid foundation of any valuable organization is its workers. Workers come with knowledge and ideas, however on occasion human resource remains idle. Participation in making decision processes not simply empowers employees to add to the effectiveness of a company, but also increases professionalism, welfare and efficiency (Callus & Lansbury 2002 p.258). Callus et al. (1991) argues that the trade unions in Australia have embraced the business bargaining about the pay and have attempted to impact organizational reforms by entrenching ‘managing change’ sections in the accord which places employers to on-going discussion preceding to the implementing of industrial reforms and to discuss any arising redundancies. Due to a win by the National party and Conservative Liberal coalition in 1996, their government embarked on labor market policy hard stand which put them on a collision with union movements. Norington (2006) argues that the government suggested an unilateral agreement of organization and employees rather than partnership with trade unions. Employee’s job motivation Job motivation holds a significant role in the manner they perform their work and task. Most workers leave their work because they feel not motivated with their job description and what they earn. Work-choices Bill protected employees from unfair dismal by their employers. Before the reform process, labor market witnessed unfair job termination with employees not given a chance to express themselves (McCallum 2005 p.23). This development led to lack of motivation because of the job security that come with it. Aspects of motivating staff can take place in a different way. One of the ways is to create a bill that protects the employees from unfair dismal and ensure job security. Actually, job security is a way of motivating workers especially during the economic downturn. Paid work transformations in Australia ensure that employees are given a chance to negotiate their payment. When an employee participates in negotiating his or her payment and benefits, and agreement is reached, both parties will have no conflict during the time the payment is given. This is because the worker gets what he believes he has worked for. With remuneration given as he wished for, the employees will be motivated and will work hard for the organization to increase its productivity. On the other hand, the payment will enhance the welfare. In the bottom line, what he/she work for is what will enable him or her to provide good housing, buy good clothing and food, pay for service and leisure activities. Therefore, it can be said that work choices and work fair reforms provided fair pay and benefits which are keystone of an effective organization that hires and retains dedicated workers. Founded on these premises, that work choice ensured employees themselves negotiate for a better living wage hence an added motivation. With no fair living wage, most organizations in Australia risk losing their best employees to a better paying ones. Improved rights Currently, employees are increasingly conscious of the significance of their rights and work-life balance. Showing the support of Fair Pay and work-life balance, Rudd’s administration therefore negotiated with stakeholders and trade unions (Burgess & Waterhouse 2010 p.131). Following the widely discussions, it therefore devised Fair Work Act in 2009 to enhance balance and equality in place of work by offering a fair and inclusive safety pay for the workers and improve efficiency for the organization. The state accommodated numerous demands from all parties and Rudd administration had effectively realized its work-life balanced and minimum wages and objectives through the adoption of Fair Work Act of 2009. Creation of The National Employment Standards provided a realistic platform of provisions for supporting minimum wages and work-life balance which motivated the employees who worked in the hospitality industry (McCallum 2005 p .21). With this institution, Australian employees became more financially protected and upheld rights to decline to work during unfairly additional hour owing to reasonableness facets such as employee's individual circumstances, the safety and health risks, family responsibilities, in addition to workplace demands, industry working models, payment and working hour’s agreements. Some of the characteristics of paid work relations in Australia include bargaining based system, unfair dismissal protections for workers, work and family life balance, the right of representation in the organization and the low paid protections. Ten other National Employment Standards were also formulated and effected in 2010 as well as maximum of weekly working hours, demands for a dynamic working system, and annual leave among others (Burgess & Waterhouse 2010 p.132). All organizations are required to evaluate their existing employment remuneration and policies to make sure they are in line with the new regulation. Fair Work watchdog plays a critical role in ensuring migrant employees also access similar basic rights as Australian employees as well (McCallum 2005 p.20). Fair Work policy in Australia made a significant stride from traditional Australian labor relations to modern settlement and conciliation. This broadens the wide wage gap and facilitates more entitlements to support Fair Go amongst various races, age and gender. Under WorkChoices, trade unions were disqualified from negotiating any new arrangements, employees were directly to agree with the employers at an individual capacity. Even though, Mr. John Howard assumed authority in the late twentieth century he recommended the method of simplifying worker’s right that made sure employees understood the procedure of job creation, variation and termination. Further changes in policies controlling union access to employees and organizations, limits their ability to lawfully represent new members while giving more rights to employees. The advantages of paid work transformation continue to be debated in Australia, and whether they would deal with the current representation gap or contribute to managerial rights in the absence of a broad ‘social partnership’ platform. Bibliography Burgess K & Waterhouse, J 2010, Balancing work, family and life: Introduction to the special edition, Australian Bulletin of Labour, vol. 36, p. 130-132. Callus, R & Lansbury, R 2002, Working futures: the changing nature of work and employment relations in Australia, Leichhardt, New South Wales, Federation Press. Lansbury, R & Davis, E 1992, Employee Participation: Some Australian Case, International Labour Review, vol. 131, no. 2, p. 231-234. McCallum R 2005, The Howard Government's Refashioning of Australian Labor Law: The Neo- Liberal Labor Law Agenda, Dissent, spring, p. 19–23. Norington, B 2006, Unfinished Business, in N. Carter (ed.), the Howard factor: A Decade That Changed the Nation, Melbourne, Melbourne University Press. 5. Medicare is often discussed as one of the few areas of social provision that is universal in Australia. Discuss, with reference to ideas about universalism and selectivity, how policies and politics over the past 15 years have either challenged or reinforced this. Biggs (2004) states that Australia Medicare is publicly financed universal health care scheme, controlled by authority set by the government. Primary health care is affordable for all Australian nationals and for permanent inhabitants, exclusive of those living in Norfolk Island. People having a Medicare card can get subsidized treatment from health facilities that have been awarded a Medicare provider rights, and can also get free treatment from public hospitals. Medicare was created by the Hawke Labor administration in 1984 (Biggs 2004). The key reforms established by the Fraser administration were mostly discarded by the Hawke administration, which went back to the initial Medibank system. Biggs (2004) asserts that Medicare was affected in 1984, after the ratification of the Health Legislation Amendment Act of 1983, as well as alterations to the National Health Act 1953 Health Insurance Act of 1973 and the Health Insurance Commission Act 1973 (Biggs 2004). The original Medibank initiative recommended a 1.35% charge with exemptions of low income but the senate rejected the bills and therefore Medibank was initially financed from general income. This paper discusses how policies and politics over the past 15years have either challenged or reinforced this Medicare in Australia (Robert et al, 2002). Policies and politics that shaped Medicare in Australia Healthcare policies are one of the controversial issues in Australia political arena. It has faced a lot of attention in every general election from 1940s when the Commonwealth initially got into the platform. Health industry is the largest in Australia having a total expense of $ 22.8 billion in 2008-2009 or 10.0% GDP (Robert et al 2002). Australian healthcare is rated through the life expectancy, amenable rates of mortality, and child mortality rates and it is one of the excellent healthcare scheme across the world. However, the healthcare has also failed thousands of Australian nationals annually. The major areas cause concern health funding, indigenous health, mental health and rural health. Since funding policy is the biggest headache for the Australian government, the debate has dragged issues of universalism and selectivity into it (Parliament of Australia 2003). Which way, Universalism or selectivity? Every healthcare policy makers are asking themselves whether healthcare should be universal or selective. More of the discussion concentrates on whether healthcare has always been universal, and whether the recommended reforms will shape that universality. The major goal to universal welfare stipulation is the charge (Parliament of Australia 2003). Universal Medicare in Australia is thought to be inadequately targeted since they do not emphasize on the assistance to those in demand. Selectivity is frequently put forth as being more effective since it is claimed that less funds is spent for it to be offered. Evidently, if the government of Australia chose selective Medicare services, they were bound to face the problem of administrative complexity and expensive system to run (Parliament of Australia 2003). Policy makers also contend that selective Medicare contributes towards the development of poverty entraps and grind down political support in the welfare states. For this reason, Australian government settled for universality; Medicare that are accessible for all. Popularity of Australian Medicare is brought by the fact of its universalism. As a result, universal, institutionalized welfare schemes are trickier to do way with. Politics and funding Despite promising the contrary, when John Howard was re-elected in 1996, he rolled back Medicare focusing on private sectors employing both punitive like and rewards like rebates steps to persuade individuals to take out private healthcare insurance (Harris & Gavel & Young 2005 p. 296). This move by Howard especially Fairer Medicare policy faced protest from different sources such as the royal Australasian College of Physicians. From the time labor party was re-elected in 2007 under the leadership of Kevin Rudd, health reform policies had experienced a lot of change characterized by Medicare funding and health care facilities management systems (Harris & Gavel & Young 2005). Funding policy was kicked off by Kevin Rudd to operate under the National Health and Hospitals reforms. The commissions forwarded its report in 2009. The report recommended that the government should adopt a clause that Commonwealth ought to raise its shares towards public hospital finance, in response for some GST incomes for every state. The report proposed that Commonwealth should pay 60 percent of the cost in 2009-10 budgets (Metherell 2009). Gillard administration’s major health framework has been an emphasis on mental health care policy. Mental health has been in the past fifteen years poorly dealt with in Australia, portraying the social stereotype of the individuals having this disease as ‘weak’ and ‘she will be right mate’ leading to stigma. It is reported that mental disease is the third leading root of disability problem in Australia, put at an approximate 27% of entire lost to disability (Metherell 2009). It is this report that prompted the government to initiate considerable policies entailing mental health in Australia. In the federal budget of 2011-12, Labor Government pledged to set aside $2.2 billions of extra finance to mental care for next five years and $572 million for extra support for individuals with mental disease (Robert et al 2002). $12 million was also set aside for the establishment of National Mental Health Commission reporting to prime minister. This policy package was a step forward to sustaining 10-year plan on mental healthcare reform (Robert et al 2002.) Challenges facing funding Several issues exist facing the success of healthcare funding in future. The political wavering between different financing systems tops the list of challenges. The political wavering and partisanship in the past has led to indecisiveness and lack of clear interest in the side of the administration of the day (Metherell 2009). This was witnessed in Canberra debated on healthcare policies simply shifted from policies to lack of in depth discussion and political scoring. Other financing challenges health care system faces include the effects of the consumer’s charges, funding model and health inflation. Metherell (2009) argues that Consumers fees imposed on the individuals who use healthcare facilities and services are insufficient in reducing inequality in the Australian healthcare system. Higher consumer fees that mainly occurred during the reigns of coalition governments resulted to individuals falling under the lower incomes not using health facilities and service as they would want. This happened despite the existence of safety nets, which offers individuals and families with financial help for higher out-of–pocket charges (Robert et al 2002). Healthcare inflation is another major challenge that requires to be tackled so as to enhance the healthcare system in Australia. Nevertheless, whatever the incentive could be, inflation cost for healthcare keep on each year. Research on healthcare payment system suggests that single payer mechanisms can be more effective and less difficult to implement (Metherell 2009). This is because the state draws money from several sources like employer funding and public funding then channels it to the universal healthcare. The system has not favored Australia because they shifted to multipayer system in the recent years which has a blend of public and private financing of health care system. Multipayer is sub-optimal and complex and infeasible to administer. Bibliography Metherell, M 2009, High Cost of Health Reform, The Sydney Morning Herald. Biggs, A 2004, Medicare – Background Brief, Parliament of Australia: Parliamentary Library, Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia. Parliament of Australia 2003, Is medicare Universal, viewed 10th June 2013 from http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22library %2Fprspub%2FSUA96%22 Harris, M., Gavel, P & Young J 2005, Factors influencing the choice of specialty of Australian medical graduates, Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 183, no. 6, pp. 295-300. Robert J, Blendon et al, 2002, inequalities in Healcare : A Five-County Survey, Health Aaffrairs Read More