In the latter part of 1997, and the first half of 1998, Australian industrial relations was dominated by a major recognition dispute on the waterfront. Patrick Stevedores sacked its Maritime Union of Australia workforce on 7 April 1998, employing labour supplied by a National Farmers Federation subsidiary. The sackings precipitated mass picketing around Australian ports. The Federal Court issued an interlocutory injunction, which in essentials was upheld by the High Court 6-1, ordering reinstatement of the workforce because of the possibility that Patrick, the National Farmers Federation and the Australian government had conspired to thwart the Freedom of Association provisions of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 (Comm.). The dispute is further complicated by an unsuccessful attempt to train former and current military personnel as stevedores in the port of Dubai. This article examines and analyses major twists and turns associated with this dispute.

This paper focusses on what the judicial battles in the waterfront dispute tell us about the role of law and what implications this has for labour relations and corporate law. For labour law, the significance is that reliance on liberal law has limited potential for workers seeking to pursue their causes through the courts. For corporate law, the Court’s decision makes it plain that, when there is an overt conflict between wealth owners and workers, the courts will try to obfuscate this, while ensuring the security of property owners. To this end, the High Court-despite scolarly criticism-treated each corporation in the Patrick group as if it were an independent atom. This ruling will be a green light to other anti-union employers and will disadvantage workers in a system which increasingly makes their rights dependent on the legal identity of their employer.

Industrial Relations returned to the forefront of the Australian public debate in 1998 with the dispute between the Federal Government and Patrick Stevedores on the one hand and the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) on the other. This article, which was written in April 1998 at the height of the dispute, concentrates on the economic issues involved and the facts about ‘waterfront reform’. The article analyses the economic aspects of the dispute in terms of employment issues, productivity issues, industrial relations and the relationship between waterfront reform and Australia’s international trade. It concludes that economic issues must be understood carefully in order to distinguish between genuine practical concerns about waterfront efficiency and purely political points made by those who oppose the MUA and trade unionism in general.

This article considers some of the policy issues at stake in the waterfront dispute, including an analysis of the factors that led to the dispute and a discussion of the likely outcomes of the new negotiated agreements. It concludes that the introduction of another competitor into the Australian stevedoring industry is relatively unlikely. Without such competition and in the face of 100 percent unionisation, it is not clear whether the short-run gains in productivity from the latest round of enterprise agreements will necessarily be sustained.

Vocational rehabilitation of injured workers to facilitate their early return to work is now an established feature of workers’ compensation arrangements in Australia. Critical to the return to work process is the provision by employers of suitable employment for workers following work related injury wherever this is reasonably practicable. This article emphasises the importance of employment security measures within the workers’ compensation arena for both injured workers and the control of scheme costs. It highlights the precarious nature of employment security measures in Australian workers’ compensation schemes due largely to the lack of enforcement, and the concomitant need for legislative and administrative reform. In doing so a number of specific reform proposals are put forward for discussion. In addition the nexus between employment security measures and the operation of the labour market is briefly considered.

The link between inter-firm networks and industrial development in Taiwan has rarely been conspicuously identified in the extant literature. This paper highlights the existence of such a link, first in the labour-intensive phase of industrialisation from early 1960s to late 1970s, and then in the current phase of technology-intensive industrial development in Taiwan. However, established forms of inter-firm networks within and across the Taiwanese border have structural limitations to generate innovation from within the networks. This impedes further development of Taiwan’s industries, in particular those which are more technology-intensive. Using the information technology industry as a case study, this paper examines the role of the state and the private businesses in fostering the formation of newer forms of inter-firm networks which contribute to Taiwan’s further industrial development.

The aim of this paper is to explore the possibility of explaining labour market restructuring in terms of employers’ labour utilisation strategies. The main arena of activity in the labour market is within employing organisations. Therefore, whilst national and industry level labour market studies may shed some light on labour market trends, this paper suggests that analysis should also assess the impact of activity within firms. A case study is used to examine the link between the employment polices and practices of a firm in the metals manufacturing industry and the labour market position of its employees taking into account the firm’s institutional context (award restructuring, enterprise bargaining, and an active union presence). The study finds that the firm’s pursuit of flexibility in order to improve its cost and quality competitiveness is exacerbating and reproducing divisions within the workforce based on workers’ attributes (sex, English proficiency and formal qualifications). Labour market explanation should include, if not begin with, the role of employers.