Compulsory Arbitration and the Wage Structure in Australia

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Despite the growth of collective bargaining the Australian system of wage determination remains significantly different from that practised elsewhere. The purpose of the paper is to test the claim that compulsory arbitration brings about a more egalitarian wage structure than would obtain under free collective bargaining. The method used is to compare wage relativities in Australia and Britain on a number of different bases, and where possible at different times. The main conclusion is that wage structures are very similar in the two countries. Four main differences are identified; in Australia skill differentials widened to a much lesser extent in the inter-war years, the move towards equal pay for women was more rapid, there are one or two low paying in dustries where pay is closer to the average than in Britain, and the relative pay of managers and professional workers is lower. The latter effect cannot be attributed to arbitration but the other cases may be. In general, given the over all similarity of wages relativities in the two countries, the author concludes that the evidence does not support the claim of egalitarianism made for com pulsory arbitration.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: