The changing structure of labour regulation: the Australian domestic airline industry, 1990-2006

This thesis contributes to the continuing, unresolved debates — in both theory and policy — over the structure of labour regulation within Australia and overseas. This contribution comes through an extended critique of the existing literature, as well as providing a description and explanation of the changing structure of labour regulation in one industry: the Australian domestic airlines. Conceptually, the thesis is based on an exchange with the ‘bargaining structures’ literature. It is argued that, despite its many strengths, this literature has delivered only a partial description. The full picture of labour regulation change remains obscured. Part of the problem can easily be seen in the term ‘bargaining structure’ since many significant regulatory processes do not involve ‘bargaining’. The traditional preoccupation in the existing literature with ‘collective’ forms of regulation also privileges a process that no longer dominates the making of the rules of the employment relationship. This thesis replaces ‘bargaining structure’ with the broader concept of ‘labour regulation’. Secondly, explanations in the existing literature of bargaining structures are excessively narrow and lack holism. The thesis therefore develops and applies a broader and more systematic framework for the analysis of ‘labour regulation’, bringing together both context and agency. The empirical investigation was conducted across three companies and several unions within the Australian airline industry between 1990 and 2006. The descriptive account confirms that the structure of labour regulation shifted significantly: the parties changed, the level of regulation decentralised, the scope of regulation declined and complexity increased. The highly unionised nature of the industry meant that collective regulation continued, but it was under pressure and its character changed. Non-bargained and individualistic forms of regulation were on the increase. The explanation for these changes lies in a complex interplay between a series of mostly state-induced contextual factors. These altered the product market and changed the regulatory options available to the parties, together with the agency of both management and unions.