Deeks, J., Rasmussen, E. (2002), Employment Relations in New Zealand .Prentice-Hall : Auckland. Ch. 3 Barry, M. and Wailes, N.(2004) “Contrasting Systems? 100 Years of Arbitration in Australia and New Zealand” Journal of Industrial Relations 46(4), 430-447 Describe and discuss the impact of the 1894 Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration (IC&A) Act on New Zealand’s employment relations system. Was the Act’s demise inevitable?” Looking for:
Understanding of the intentions behind 1894 legislation
Its impact on employment relations in NZ 1894 - 1990
Why it was, first, significantly amended and, second, replaced
Questions:
Why was it introduced? Immediate causes (industrial strife) Political context (Pember Reeves and new government) Functional advantages (e.g. Problem solving, conflict reducing, positive impact on economy etc)
Impacts:
What were its immediate impacts?
Were those impacts sustained?
How was the arbitration system amended in 1920s and 1930, and why?
What was the post Second World War context and how was the Act adjusted then?
1960’s Onwards:
What pressures on the arbitration system grew in the 1960s?
What were the parties’ responses to those pressures?
How was the system amended/adapted 1960s – 1980s? Conclusions:
Was the 1894 legislation successful?
Were the pressures on the arbitration system so great that it had to change, that is was wholesale change inevitable?
If change had been introduced earlier, more gradually, would the root-and-branch changes in the 1990s have been necessary?
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/labor_studies_journal/v031/31.4barry.html http://www.teara.govt.nz/1966/L/LabourDepartmentOf/IndustrialRelations/en
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Conciliation_and_Arbitration_Act_1894 http://www.justice.govt.nz/employment/history/default.asp