<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com">
<title>Journal of Industrial Relations recent issues</title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com</link>
<description>Journal of Industrial Relations RSS feed -- recent issues</description>
<prism:publicationName>Journal of Industrial Relations</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>0022-1856</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/4/435?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/439?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/459?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/489?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/501?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/517?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/529?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/543?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/557?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/575?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/3/283?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/285?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/297?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/313?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/331?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/347?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/365?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/379?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/395?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/411?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/2/147?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/151?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/173?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/195?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/213?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/227?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/245?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/262?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/5?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/25?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/45?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/59?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/75?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/95?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/113?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/131?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/137?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/139?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/141?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://jir.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif">
<title>Journal of Industrial Relations</title>
<url>http://jir.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif</url>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/4/435?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Corporate Ownership, Governance and Employment Relations]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/4/435?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pendleton, A., Westcott, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339511</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Corporate Ownership, Governance and Employment Relations]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>438</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>435</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/439?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Are Superannuation Funds and other Institutional Investors in Australia Acting Like 'Universal Investors'?]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/439?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This study investigates whether Australian superannuation funds and other institutional investors are concerned with the human resource management (HRM) and industrial relations (IR) practices of companies. It examines whether they use indicators of HRM or IR practices in their investment decisions and whether they attempt to influence these types of practices through other means, in the same way that investors are now doing so regarding corporate governance issues. The study finds there are embryonic signs of investors doing both. However, the ad hoc nature of engagement as well as significant information barriers, reduce the efficacy of this engagement.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Marshall, S., Anderson, K., Ramsay, I.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339512</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Are Superannuation Funds and other Institutional Investors in Australia Acting Like 'Universal Investors'?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>458</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>439</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/459?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Corporate Governance and Training]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/459?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article uses the notion of national recipes of corporate governance to explore national differences in the provision, extent, range, cost and arrangements made for training by employers. Drawing on an extensive database, careful analysis shows that there are significant differences between the liberal market economies and others in their employer training provision and systems. The research also highlighted considerable differences in practice in coordinated market economies, most notably between the social democracies of the Nordic countries and the Rhineland continental economies. The data also shows evidence of the embeddedness of training systems in the society and the industrial relations systems in which they operate: there are a limited number of clusters of countries that retain distinctive features. These clusters broadly correspond to the five different models of capitalism identified by Amable (2003), with differences encountered being generally on the lines predicted by the latter.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Goergen, M., Brewster, C., Wood, G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339513</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Corporate Governance and Training]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>487</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>459</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/489?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Private Equity in the UK: Job Regulation and Trade Unions]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/489?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Private equity represents a &lsquo;new actor&rsquo; in the British business system with the capacity to have a significant impact on industrial relations. However, while private equity and its associated business model appear as significant factors in corporate governance and industrial relations, neither the sector nor the business model has been evaluated theoretically or empirically. Indeed, for the UK at firm level the ways in which business strategy and job regulation are shaped by private equity are unclear other than by references made to institutional configuration in the business system &mdash; short-termism. This article outlines what private equity is, details its associated business model, describes how the sector affects workers and summarizes how trade unions have responded to the private equity business model.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Clark, I.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339514</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Private Equity in the UK: Job Regulation and Trade Unions]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>500</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>489</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/501?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Impact of Private Equity and Buyouts on Employment, Remuneration and other HRM Practices]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/501?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>In this article we consider the impact of private equity and buyouts on employment, remuneration, and other human resource management practices by reviewing and synthesizing existing studies. We show that the impact tends to differ between buyouts and buy-ins, and argue that private equity is a heterogeneous phenomenon. Several issues that would benefit from further research are identified including the relative impact on employment, terms and conditions and job quality for managerial and non-managerial employees.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Wright, M., Bacon, N., Amess, K.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339515</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Impact of Private Equity and Buyouts on Employment, Remuneration and other HRM Practices]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>515</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>501</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/517?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Private Equity: Levered on Capital or Labour?]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/517?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article argues that, during the 2002&mdash;7 conjuncture, private equity was levered on capital, not labour. During this period of rapid up-scaling the sources of the gains were variable and included financial engineering and windfall trading gains. In general terms, the favourable conditions of cheap and available debt meant that restructuring at the expense of employment conditions was not a necessary, or even important, part of all private equity deals. The first half of the article reviews the narrative and numbers on the employment effects of private equity, highlighting the counter claims of different narrative positions and the heterogeneous nature of the evidence. The second part of the article presents an alternative view of private equity, arguing that the change in conjuncture after the credit crunch that began in 2007 will mean that different sources of gain become more important.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Folkman, P., Froud, J., Williams, K., Johal, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339516</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Private Equity: Levered on Capital or Labour?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>527</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>517</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/529?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Private Equity in Australia]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/529?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Private equity investment in Australia has changed in both extent and nature over the last few years. In particular, transactions where a private equity fund buys out a mature publicly listed company have increased. The targeting of &lsquo;iconic&rsquo; companies such as Qantas by private equity heightened the concerns held in some quarters of the possible impact of private equity ownership on corporate stability and employment conditions in these companies. This article provides an overview of private equity transactions in Australia. It also reviews the major concerns with the private equity business model, which were presented by various parties to a senate enquiry in 2007. It argues that a window of opportunity was open during 2006 and 2007 for private equity owners to extract returns on their investment by reducing employment costs using the Work Choices legislation. That such an approach was not pursued suggests that private equity funds realize returns through a number of avenues, not just by reducing running costs or rationalizing productive assets.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Westcott, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339517</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Private Equity in Australia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>542</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>529</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/543?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Private Equity and American Labor: Multiple, Pragmatic Responses Mirroring Labor's Strengths and Weaknesses]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/543?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article briefly describes the recent growth of private equity, details some of the challenges such growth has posed for American labor, and outlines ways in which labor has chosen to respond. In so doing it suggests that the diverse, complicated, and practical choices labor has made to date have been shaped by the particular strengths and weaknesses of its position in American society. More particularly, these choices place the emphasis on (1) legislative change, relating mainly to tax rather than regulatory policy (labor-related or otherwise); (2) capital strategies, by which unions and pension funds engage companies in connection with corporate governance and investments that might be made in or withheld from them; and (3) high-profile campaigns relating to the reputation of private equity firms and their investee companies (as compared to traditional means of securing union recognition or exercising collective bargaining rights).</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Beeferman, L. W.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339518</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Private Equity and American Labor: Multiple, Pragmatic Responses Mirroring Labor's Strengths and Weaknesses]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>556</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>543</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/557?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Australian Health and Safety Inspectors' Perceptions and Actions in Relation to Changed Work Arrangements]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/557?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Extensive international research points to an association between changed work arrangements, especially those commonly labelled as contingent work, with adverse occupational health and safety (OHS) outcomes. Research also indicates these work arrangements have weakened or bypassed existing OHS and workers&rsquo; compensation regulatory regimes. However, there has been little if any research into how OHS inspectors perceive these issues and how they address them during workplace visits or investigations. Between 2003 and 2007 research was undertaken that entailed detailed documentary and statistical analysis, extended interviews with 170 regulatory managers and inspectors, and observational data collected while accompanying inspectors on 118 &lsquo;typical&rsquo; workplace visits. Key findings are that inspectors responsible for a range of industries see altered work arrangements as a serious challenge, especially labour hire (agency work) and subcontracting. Though the law imposes clear obligations, inspectors identified misunderstanding/blameshifting and poor compliance amongst parties to these arrangements. The complexity of these work arrangements also posed logistical challenges to inspectorates.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Quinlan, M., Johnstone, R., McNamara, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339519</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Australian Health and Safety Inspectors' Perceptions and Actions in Relation to Changed Work Arrangements]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>573</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>557</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/575?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Using Public Procurement to Promote Better Labour Standards in Australia: A Case Study of Responsive Regulatory Design]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/4/575?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The former Federal Coalition Government&rsquo;s industrial relations reforms restricted the capacity of state governments to make labour law, inspiring them to consider more innovative ways of regulating labour standards in the private sector including through greater use of public procurement. This article presents a case study of a program in which an Australian state government has sought to use its purchasing power to regulate labour standards in the cleaning industry. The authors assess this program against a model of responsive regulation. They suggest that there is potential to extend this model to other areas of government procurement.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Howe, J., Landau, I.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-09-16</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609339520</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Using Public Procurement to Promote Better Labour Standards in Australia: A Case Study of Responsive Regulatory Design]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>589</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>575</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Articles</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/3/283?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Foreword]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/3/283?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Gillard, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104297</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Foreword]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>284</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>283</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/285?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Forward with Fairness? Industrial Relations under Labor in 2008]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/285?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The Rudd government was elected in late 2007 after a national election campaign centred squarely on industrial relations. In 2008, with a massive mandate, the government presented key pieces of legislation to the Australian parliament, aimed at moving away from the Howard government's Work Choices and toward implementing the `Forward with Fairness' election policy. The government's substantive industrial relations legislation &mdash; the Fair Work Bill &mdash; was introduced late in 2008 to widespread, though not universal, approval from trade unionists and, at first, muted acceptance and, later, and in the face of deteriorating economic circumstances, sharper criticism from employer groups.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cooper, R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104298</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Forward with Fairness? Industrial Relations under Labor in 2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>296</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>285</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/297?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Industrial Legislation in 2008]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/297?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>In March 2008, the Rudd Government started to dismantle Work Choices. The <I>Workplace Relations Amendment (Transition to Forward with Fairness) Act 2008</I> (Cth) reintroduced agreement-making safeguards, and removed the option of making Australian Workplace Agreements. The legislation also provided the legal framework for the creation of `modern awards', paving the way for the more far-reaching reforms that are outlined in the Fair Work Bill 2008 (Cth). The first section of the article examines these transitional measures. The second section briefly considers the key features of the Fair Work Bill, concluding that its content and relative simplicity are broadly consistent with the promises made by the Government in its pre-election Forward with Fairness policy. Finally, the article highlights some of the legislative developments at the State level in 2008.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sutherland, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104299</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Industrial Legislation in 2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>311</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>297</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/313?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Labour Markets and Wages in 2008]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/313?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The Australian economy in 2008 was one of contrasts: the resource based states continued to grow at relatively higher rates than the remainder; wage and employment outcomes varied widely for different groups in the labour force; and domestic climate change policies achieved prominence just as a global economic downturn led to rapidly changing macroeconomic conditions. Within this rapidly changing context, ongoing concerns with labour utilization, wage equity and issues of compliance appear likely to grow in significance.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Preston, A., Jefferson, T.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104300</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Labour Markets and Wages in 2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>330</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>313</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/331?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Women, Work and Industrial Relations in 2008]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/331?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The year 2008 was a busy one for matters relating to women, work and industrial relations. The Labor Government introduced the Fair Work Bill with a new bargaining stream for low paid workers and new National Employment Standards, which include the right to request flexible working arrangements and extended unpaid parental leave. A number of public inquires on issues pertaining to women and work were also initiated. In this first annual review of women, work and industrial relations we focus on three topics highlighted in 2008 &mdash; pay equity, working hours flexibility and paid maternity leave &mdash; and assess the implications of the proposed policy changes for women and gender equity.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Baird, M., Williamson, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104301</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Women, Work and Industrial Relations in 2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>346</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>331</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/347?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Employer Matters in 2008]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/347?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>In terms of employer matters, the year 2008 may be best characterized as one dominated by change, challenge and Canberra, as the political landscape was transformed, industrial relations legislation was rewritten and global capitalism went into financial meltdown. The new political and economic environment seemed to demand a greater emphasis on consultation, efforts at cooperation and, dare I say it, in some cases even `consensus'. Nevertheless, employers were nonetheless active in pursuing their own objectives, with the main employer associations preoccupied for most of 2008 lobbying for changes and amendments to the form and substance of Labor's new industrial relations regime, <I>Forward with Fairness</I>. Importantly, the new industrial and legal landscape suggested that the changed status of the `parties' vis-a-vis awards, is likely to lead to increased competition for relevance among employer associations, leading to a series of amalgamations and rationalization, much as occurred with unions in the 1990s.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Mackinnon, B. H.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104302</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Employer Matters in 2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>363</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>347</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/365?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Unions and Collective Bargaining in 2008]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/365?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>For Australian unions, 2008 was the first year with a federal labour government in office after more than a decade of conservative government. Attention focused on the promised dismantling of the Work Choices legislation and the introduction of a new legislative framework, although it took until late November for the Fair Work Bill to be introduced into federal parliament. Confronting a disappointing decline in union membership levels, a number of union campaigns focused on recollectivizing workplaces. For other unions, collective bargaining with employers was a frustrating experience, as was the case with Qantas and Telstra. Public sector unions faced lengthy and hard-fought disputes with state labour governments, while an extraordinary dispute over electricity privatization unfolded between unions and the New South Wales Labor government. By the end of the year, the impact of the global financial crisis, and the consequences for jobs was the prevailing concern for many unions.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brigden, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104303</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Unions and Collective Bargaining in 2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>378</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>365</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/379?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Major Tribunal Decisions in 2008]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/379?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>On 28 March 2008 a historic process of award modernization, by which Australia's award system will be fundamentally changed, began. Over 4000 existing federal awards and NAPSAs will be replaced by modern awards created primarily along industry lines, and occasionally along occupational lines. Modern awards will operate from January 2010 and, together with the National Employment Standards, will constitute the safety net under Labor's industrial relations system. This article considers some aspects of the award modernization process and the pivotal role of the AIRC in creating modern awards. This article also considers recent case law dealing with the implied duties to act in good faith and of mutual trust and confidence.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Catanzariti, J., Brown, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104304</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Major Tribunal Decisions in 2008]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>393</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>379</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/395?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Indian Industrial Relations System: Struggling to Address the Dynamics of a Globalizing Economy]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/395?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The industrial relations system in India has been under pressure for decades and new problems are emerging as the country becomes more integrated into the global economy. The main architecture of the system was established prior to Independence and remains mostly unchanged. The system is highly centralized and the state is the main mediator between capital and labour. Unions have historically enjoyed a close relationship with the state through party-based federations, but this has undermined their success developing a robust grassroots constituency and experience in collective bargaining. This essay provides a broad overview of the evolution of the Indian system of industrial relations and the labour market reform debate that has arisen in the context of economic change. The structure of the Indian labour market, the overwhelming size of the informal or `unorganized' workforce, and its location outside the industrial system is the fundamental challenge facing Indian industrial relations. There is an urgent need to develop a system that embraces all workers especially given India's demographic profile and the expected increase in the number of working age people over the next decade. The experience of women workers and the failure of both the industrial system and the union movement to understand and accommodate their needs is also an important challenge for industrial relations in India.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hill, E.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104305</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Indian Industrial Relations System: Struggling to Address the Dynamics of a Globalizing Economy]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>410</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>395</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/411?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Rethinking the Regulation of Vulnerable Work in the USA: A Sector-based Approach]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/3/411?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article discusses one of the major challenges of US workplace policy: protecting roughly 35m workers who are vulnerable to a variety of major risks in the workplace. After laying out the dimensions of this problem, I show that the vulnerable workforce is concentrated in a subset of sectors with distinctive industry characteristics. Examining how employer organizations relate to one another in these sectors provides insight into some of the causes as well as possible solutions for redressing workforce vulnerability in the US as well as other countries facing similar problems.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Weil, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-05-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185609104842</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Rethinking the Regulation of Vulnerable Work in the USA: A Sector-based Approach]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>430</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>411</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/2/147?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Federal Systems of Industrial Relations]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/2/147?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Patmore, G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608101703</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Federal Systems of Industrial Relations]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>150</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>147</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/151?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Origins of Federal Industrial Relations Systems: Australia, Canada and the USA]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/151?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>There are tensions in federal political systems over whether the central government or the states/provinces are the most suitable jurisdictions for dealing with the relationship between employers and unions. As integrated national economies developed, there are growing pressures on federal governments to intervene in industrial relations. States/provinces, however, might still maintain unique economic and social conditions that render federal legislation inappropriate. This article examines the development of federal jurisdictions in Australia, Canada and the USA up until the late 1940s. While Australia, unlike the other the two countries, had a constitution that provided for federal coverage of industrial relations, it was a limited power. Despite this, there was a gradual spread of federal coverage beyond that originally intended by the original framers of the Australian Constitution. The Canadian and US constitutions predate the rise of organized industrial relations. However, federal governments in these countries also increased their involvement in industrial relations to resolve disputes in key national industries such as railways and in response to critical events such as the Great Depression and World Wars, which challenged existing assumptions about industrial relations. While there was a trend towards the federal regulation of industrial relations, states and provinces still played a key role as innovators in both experimenting with new ways of regulating relations between employers and unions and imposing restrictions on the power of organized labour.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Patmore, G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608101705</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Origins of Federal Industrial Relations Systems: Australia, Canada and the USA]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>172</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>151</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/173?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Pragmatism, Principles and Policy: Federalism and Industrial Relations Regulation in Australia]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/173?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Traditionally, industrial relations in Australia have been governed by a dual system of federal and State regulation. In recent decades there have been two attempts to create a single national system of industrial relations regulation. In 1973, the Whitlam (Australian Labor Party) government proposed two constitutional alteration referendum questions to give the federal parliament plenary law making powers over `prices' and `incomes', and consequently industrial relations. In 2005, the Howard (Liberal&mdash;National parties coalition) government used the existing constitutional law making powers of the federal parliament, the corporations power, to widen the coverage of the federal industrial relations system with the <I>Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act</I> 2005 (Cth) to capture about 85 percent of Australian employees. This article compares and contrasts these two efforts to create a national industrial relations system. The analysis shows that both efforts illustrate the advantages and disadvantages of federalism generally and suggests the political nature of industrial relations policy in Australia remain regardless of the regulatory jurisdiction.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Lyons, M., Khoshaba, T.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608101706</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Pragmatism, Principles and Policy: Federalism and Industrial Relations Regulation in Australia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>194</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>173</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/195?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Jurisdictional Contests over the Regulation of Work: Evidence from the NSW Oil Refining Sectors, 1976--80]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/195?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article illustrates how a contest within the Australian Workers Union over the issues of workplace autonomy and bargaining structure came to develop a particularly intractable and entrenched character as a consequence of the coexistence of state and federal industrial regulation. It argues that as the dispute played out informal coalitions developed between different fractions of organized labour, capital and the state, which hardened the positions of all parties involved in the dispute. Both federal and state tribunals acted in a manner they saw as consistent with their role of maintaining public interests, but their behaviour in fulfilling this role saw them come into direct conflict.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Westcott, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608101707</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Jurisdictional Contests over the Regulation of Work: Evidence from the NSW Oil Refining Sectors, 1976--80]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>211</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>195</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/213?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[National and Provincial Influences on Public Sector Pay: Northern Ireland after 1945]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/213?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article examines the national and regional pressures in Northern Ireland in the post-war period for parity in public sector pay with the rest of the UK. Northern Ireland had a devolved legislature and government within the UK from 1921 and was constitutionally in an essentially federal relationship with the rest of the UK. However, the Stormont Government chose to use legislative devolution to minimize policy differences with the rest of the UK. The article highlights the national industrial relations environment as the backdrop for provincial developments in pay setting. It establishes the important role played by the Social Services Agreement negotiated with the Labour Government at Westminster in triggering the principle of parity in public sector pay in the early post-war years. The principle of pay parity subsequently became a benchmark for regional trade union coercive comparisons in collective bargaining across the devolved public sector. The article highlights the policy relevance of these developments both to the UK Treasury and to devolved Governments in the UK, as they address the issue of regional public sector pay.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Black, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608101708</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[National and Provincial Influences on Public Sector Pay: Northern Ireland after 1945]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>226</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>213</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/227?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Psychological Impact of Industrial Strikes: Does Involvement in Union Activity during Strikes make a Difference?]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/227?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The current study investigated the psychological impact of a United Steelworkers of America strike on the steelworkers involved, and the relationship between psychological well-being and individuals' levels of involvement in union activity during the strike. Three hundred and fifty-one steelworkers (302 `strikers' and 49 `non-strikers') completed surveys measuring a range of demographic and psychological well-being variables. Strikers, compared to non-strikers, reported higher levels of depression, anxiety, and irritation, and lower levels of mental health. For strikers, engaging in higher levels of union activity during the strike was associated with better psychological well-being. Jahoda's theory of deprivation during unemployment is used as the lens through which to explain some of the results, supporting the view that latent benefits associated with work are important for psychological well-being. A range of practical implications are offered for unions and their members.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Fowler, J. L., Gudmundsson, A. J., Whicker, L. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608101709</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Psychological Impact of Industrial Strikes: Does Involvement in Union Activity during Strikes make a Difference?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>243</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>227</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/245?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[`Grievance Gravy Train Picking up Speed': Myths and Reality around Employment Disputes in New Zealand]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/245?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Since the late 1980s there has been a growing concern among employers in New Zealand that employees take advantage of personal grievance provisions to make more claims and gain higher compensation when problems arise in employment relationships. The current study used data from a national sample of employers within the private sector and found that the cost of resolving employment problems for employers was relatively low, particularly when disputes were resolved in-house. Further it was found that employers' satisfaction with the dispute resolution was mostly affected by the method by which the resolution was achieved, rather than by the cost or benefits resulting from the disputes. Possible explanations for this phenomenon are discussed.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Shulruf, B., Woodhams, B., Howard, C., Johri, R., Yee, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608101710</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[`Grievance Gravy Train Picking up Speed': Myths and Reality around Employment Disputes in New Zealand]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>261</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>245</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/262?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Persistent Australian Gender Wage Inequality 1990 to 2003: Stakeholders' Views of Why and How]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/2/262?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Qualitative research on the perceptions of industrial relations stakeholders of the persistence of gender wage inequality during the period 1990 to 2003 is reported. During this period the gap between the average weekly ordinary time earnings of women and men working full time in Australia decreased by only one and a half percentage points, from 17 percent in 1990, to 15.5 percent in 2003 and the gap in Western Australia widened by 5 percentage points. Interviewees and the literature indicated that gender wage inequality was greatest within occupations whilst also occurring between occupations. Stakeholders interviewed felt that gender-related social/cultural values pervade the formal system of industrial relations as well as the wider society. These social/cultural values, changing slower than economic and industrial relations factors, result in persistent gender wage inequality as these values affect occupational choice before the market, the availability of jobs and training in the market and thus wages. Stakeholders showed that they believed that their gender-related values affected actions taken to, and decisions made in, industrial tribunals. Remedies for gender wage inequality thus must address not only action within the formal industrial relations system, but also perceptions and values in the wider society.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Short, C., Nowak, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-04-01</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608101711</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Persistent Australian Gender Wage Inequality 1990 to 2003: Stakeholders' Views of Why and How]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>278</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-04-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>262</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/5?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Unmet Demand for Union Membership in Australia]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/5?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Unmet demand for union membership is defined as employees in non-union workplaces who would join a union if given the opportunity. Unmet demand is a significant issue for Australian unions as union density continues to decline and the current legislative environment remains hostile. This article gauges the contours of unmet demand for union membership in Australia, drawing on responses to the Australian Worker Representation and Participation Survey (AWRPS 2004). It finds a significant level of unmet demand for union membership in Australia. Unmet demand varies according to workplace and employee characteristics and is highest among low income earners, younger workers, workers with shorter organizational tenure and workers in routinized occupations. The practical implications of our findings are discussed in relation to union renewal and the legislative environment prevailing in 2008.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pyman, A., Teicher, J., Cooper, B., Holland, P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608099662</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Unmet Demand for Union Membership in Australia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>24</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>5</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/25?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Better the Devil you Know? An Analysis of Employers' Bargaining Preferences in the Australian Hotel Industry]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/25?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The pursuit of regulatory reform is ongoing in Australia. To date, research has examined the purposes and outcomes associated with these regulatory reforms, while the actual preferences of employers seem to have been overlooked. This is particularly remiss given that the Government has founded much of its reform agenda, including Work Choices, on the supposed `needs of employers'. Given this oversight, this article examines employers' bargaining preferences and experiences in a sample of Australian luxury hotels. The findings deepen our understanding of employers' regulatory preferences and subsequently challenge the rationale and direction of Government policy in Australia.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Knox, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608099663</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Better the Devil you Know? An Analysis of Employers' Bargaining Preferences in the Australian Hotel Industry]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>44</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>25</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/45?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Articulation Work Skills and the Recognition of Call Centre Competences in Australia]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/45?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Debates over whether customer service work is deskilled or part of the knowledge economy tend to focus on single issues such as control, emotional labour or information management. Call centre work, however, falls within a spectrum of service jobs requiring simultaneous and multifaceted work with people, information and technology, This activity, which we call `articulation work', is often performed within tight timeframes and requires workers, first, to integrate their own tasks into an ongoing `line' of work, and second, to collaborate in maintaining the overall work-flow. The requisite skills, of awareness, interaction management and coordination, tend to be poorly specified in competency standards that subdivide work into discrete tasks. We compare examples of call centre competency standards with case study accounts of the use of articulation work skills, arguing the need for a taxonomy allowing the recognition of different levels of these skills across the service sector.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hampson, I., Junor, A., Barnes, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608099664</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Articulation Work Skills and the Recognition of Call Centre Competences in Australia]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>58</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>45</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/59?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Australian Workplace Agreements in Universities]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/59?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article details the use of Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) in universities after the Higher Education Workplace Relations Requirements (HEWRRs) mandated that all university staff be offered an AWA by the end of August 2006. It is clear from the evidence that, despite this requirement, at most universities there was little take-up of this form of individual employment arrangement. Of the few who did sign an AWA, one group stood out more than others &mdash; senior general staff. However at most universities, these workers have traditionally been employed on individual, common law contracts and moving them from one form of individualized employment arrangement to another did little to increase the overall pool of those on individual employment arrangements in higher education. Once these senior general staff were excluded from the equation, the take-up rate was very low indeed. The research demonstrates that the Howard government's approach to increasing the take-up rate of AWAs in universities failed. With the election of the Rudd Labor Government in November 2007, the very low take-up of AWAs has meant that the university sector has a relatively small task in moving staff back to collective employment arrangements.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[van Barneveld, K.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608099665</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Australian Workplace Agreements in Universities]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>74</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>59</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/75?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Still Searching for the Evidence? Evidence-based Policy, Performance Pay and Teachers]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/75?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>The evidence based policy (EBP) movement became prominent in the UK in the late 1990s, portrayed as an ideology-free method of policy development and implementation. This article assesses the EBP claims by analysing a case study of one piece of policy implementation, namely the introduction of performance-related pay (PRP) for schoolteachers in England and Wales. Using primary and secondary sources, the article argues that while previous evidence was brought into the policy development processes, it was largely ignored. Indeed, prosaic political considerations may well have shaped the policy. Indeed, the teachers' attitudes towards PRP suggest that few of the objectives will be met.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Farrell, C., Morris, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608099666</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Still Searching for the Evidence? Evidence-based Policy, Performance Pay and Teachers]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>94</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>75</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/95?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[On-the-Job Training in Canada: Associations with Information Technology, Innovation and Competition]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/95?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>This article focuses on the associations between on-the-job training and new information technology, innovation introduced in the workplace, and competition experienced by the workplace. The study uses Statistics Canada's 2001 Workplace and Employee Survey, a Canada-wide survey of employers and employees. Only about a third of Canadian workers receive on-the-job training. Multivariate results show that innovation introduced in the workplace is significantly associated with providing on-the-job training. To a lesser extent, implementing new information technology and experiencing competition are also positively associated with on-the-job training. Economic growth and prosperity as well as inclusion and equality can be achieved by providing opportunities for workers to learn and develop their skills and abilities. We recommend governments to support workplaces and workers in their initiatives for the broader-focused on-the-job training since it is a social good that will benefit the society as well as the workers and their workplaces.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Zeytinoglu, I. U., Cooke, G. B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608099667</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[On-the-Job Training in Canada: Associations with Information Technology, Innovation and Competition]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>112</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>95</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/113?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Employment Disadvantage of Mothers: Evidence for Systemic Discrimination]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/51/1/113?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p>When their need to provide care and their need for paid employment are equally important, mothers try to combine <I>both</I> roles, often through part time employment, or to stagger these competing needs by taking employment breaks. Using data from the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics of Australia (HILDA) Survey<sup>1</sup> this article analyses the resulting detriments to the ability of mothers to continue career paths across the occupational spectrum. Analysis of this data is used to argue that employment disadvantage is generated by mothers' inability to conform to `ideal worker' behaviour and therefore can be construed as `systemic discrimination'. Norms of `ideal' behaviour are shown to be stronger in occupations of high status and as a result mothers are at a greater risk of becoming excluded from employment within these occupations. Further, 26 percent of Australian working mothers will experience occupational exclusion, an event where further employment is secured only by moving down the occupational hierarchy to jobs of lower socio-economic status.</p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Carney, T.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608099668</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Employment Disadvantage of Mothers: Evidence for Systemic Discrimination]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>130</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>113</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/131?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Lookism: The New Frontier of Employment Discrimination?]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/131?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Warhurst, C., van den Broek, D., Hall, R., Nickson, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608096808</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Lookism: The New Frontier of Employment Discrimination?]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>136</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>131</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/137?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Book Review: Richard B. Freeman, Peter Boxall and Peter Haynes (eds), What Workers Say: Employee Voice in the Anglo-American Workplace. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. 2007. x + 244 pp. (hbk) US$49.95, (pbk) US$19.95]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/137?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dabscheck, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/0022185608099669</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Book Review: Richard B. Freeman, Peter Boxall and Peter Haynes (eds), What Workers Say: Employee Voice in the Anglo-American Workplace. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. 2007. x + 244 pp. (hbk) US$49.95, (pbk) US$19.95]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>139</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>137</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/139?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Book Review: Ruth Milkman, L.A. Story: Immigrant Workers and the Future of the U.S. Labor Movement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2006. xiii + 244 pp. (pbk) US$24.95]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/139?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ellem, B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/00221856090510010902</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Book Review: Ruth Milkman, L.A. Story: Immigrant Workers and the Future of the U.S. Labor Movement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2006. xiii + 244 pp. (pbk) US$24.95]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>141</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>139</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/141?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Book Review: Elizabeth R. DeSombre, Flagging Standards: Globalization and Environmental, Safety and Labor Regulations at Sea. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006. 280 pp. (pbk) US$24.00]]></title>
<link>http://jir.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/51/1/141?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donn, C. B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2009-02-19</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/00221856090510010903</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Book Review: Elizabeth R. DeSombre, Flagging Standards: Globalization and Environmental, Safety and Labor Regulations at Sea. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2006. 280 pp. (pbk) US$24.00]]></dc:title>
<dc:publisher>Industrial Relations Society of Australia</dc:publisher>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>51</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>142</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2009-02-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>141</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>