Is a worker really free to leave his job?

            When Welfare to Work was first announced in 2005, the Prime Minister said that anyone who was unhappy with their employment should leave and get another job. But was this statement true, or just another glib attempt by a politician to conceal the reality faced by all workers?
            For if a worker leaves their job, because the employer's demands are unreasonable, they will get nothing from Centrelink for 8 weeks. Since July 1 2006, an 8 week non-payment penalty period " will apply to those who, without good reason...refuse a job offer or leave voluntarily "
            Let us analyse this official guideline into its two different parts:

1. Unemployed person refusing job offer
2. Worker voluntarily leaving a job

1} The Work Choices document refers to a fictitious "Billy", an unemployed job seeker who is offered work as a shop assistant. But this job that Billy is offered is contingent upon him signing an Australian Workplace Agreement (AWA) which explicitly removes award conditions for public holidays, rest breaks, bonuses, annual leave loadings, allowances, penalty rates and shift/overtime loadings. But an unemployed person cannot refuse a job offer, no matter how unfair the terms and conditions, or they will lose all income support through Centrelink for 8 weeks
            The situation was well summed up by Mr Michael Raper, President of the National Welfare Rights Network: “Under the Social Security Act there is a  requirement that a person accept a ‘reasonable’  offer of work or else be cut off employment benefits. At the moment [2005], a person is protected from exploitation by ‘reasonable’ meaning ‘at award pay and conditions’. Once these are gone after 1 July 2006, refusing to accept a suitable job could result in an 8 week non-payment period.  Following the Industrial Relations changes, if a person refuses to accept a job on the grounds they disagree with the contents of the AWA they may face this 8 week suspension of payment. The key difference is that an unemployed person must accept any job under the IR reforms. " (NWRN Media Release 13 /10/05)
            The unemployed job seeker, already under constant heavy pressure from the 'tag team' of Centrelink and the Job Networks, will be dictated to about the conditions of work they must accept.

2)  All of the above also applies to a worker who refuses to sign an AWA offered by his employer. So leaving a job , in this time of mass unemployment, is likely to lead to two months without any income at all – an impossibly long time! This 8 week penalty will cost a single person over $1600 ( $200x8 ).
       Furthermore, if a worker is "dismissed for misconduct" by the employer, he will also face an immediate 8 week non-payment period. Here the essential link to Work Choices is again evident. For the new industrial relations changes will make it hard for any worker to prove that they were not dismissed for misconduct, since the only way that they can be dismissed "unlawfully" is if the discrimination laws are broken. In any case, how many workers will have the money to challenge their sacking in court? Incidentally,  is the reason it was necessary to abolish unfair dismissal protection in workplaces with less than 100 employees.
            The Prime Minister's statement that workers are free to leave a job if they are unhappy tries to smooth over many rough edges. It belongs in the same category as his assertion that individual workers can negotiate contracts with their employer on an equal and fair basis. But where is the political opposition to such unreal statements? Under pressure from the Trade Unions, who are directly threatened by the Work Choices, the ALP has undertaken to curtail some of the industrial relations reforms. But the Labor Party leaders have said nothing against the associated and equally fundamental Welfare to Work reforms, and until they do, the oppressed workers of this country will remain disinterested in the ALP.