As Australia’s federal election campaign has finally begun, opposition leader Peter Dutton’s proposal to spend hundreds of billions in public money to build seven nuclear power plants across the country has been carefully scrutinized.

The technological unfeasibility, staggering cost, and scant detail of the Coalition’s nuclear proposal have brought criticism from federal and state governments, the CSIRO, the Climate Council, the Electrical Trade Union (ETU), the Climate Change Authority, the Australia Institute, and independent energy experts.

The CSIRO, among others, has refuted the Coalition’s claim that nuclear will be cheaper than renewables; instead, they have shown the energy produced by Australian reactors would cost approximately eight times more than the same amount of energy produced by renewables. If this cost is passed on to consumers, the average household would pay $590 per year more on their power bill. Unsurprisingly, Australia Institute polling has found that fewer than one in twenty Australians (4%) are prepared to pay this nuclear premium. 

The cost alone should be enough to bury this nuclear proposal. But it is also important to recognise how the Coalition’s plan will impact – and fail – workers.

Read the new commentary by Laurie Carmichael Distinguished Research Fellow Prof. David Peetz in The Conversation.

Can the government actually make a difference to the wages Australians earn?

A lot of attention always falls on the government’s submission to the Fair Work Commission’s annual wage review, which this year called for a real boost to award wages, above the rate of inflation.

The commission’s decision has a big impact on wages received by at least a quarter of employees, many among the lowest paid. While the government’s submission must make some difference to the outcome, it’s hard to quantify how much of a difference that is.

My new research for the Australia Institute’s Centre for Future Work focuses on another, possibly bigger impact the government can have on wages – certainly one that affects a wider range of workers. This is its effect on the bargaining power of all workers and employers.

We had a long period of poor wages growth, against a backdrop of low power for workers, driven both by markets and policy. More recently, though, the tide has started to turn.

On the 17 October 2024, Australia’s leading social policy analysts and activists met with unionists and academics to tackle what can be done to alleviate Australia’s living standards crisis. Through dialogue and discussion, attendees identified a positive policy agenda that is fairer and avoids austerity measures and divisions in society.

Key to our future success will be the building of a movement committed to working together, supporting each other, to make this change a reality.

Hear from some of those who contributed on the day:

Read the new commentary by Laurie Carmichael Distinguished Research Fellow Prof. David Peetz and Dr Lisa Heap in The Conversation.

Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are again in the spotlight – mostly because of how they can affect the way companies deal with sexual harassment allegations.

Last week, class action lawsuits were launched against mining giants BHP and Rio Tinto, alleging widespread and systemic sexual harassment on their worksites in Australia.

The law firm leading the class actions, JGA Saddler, alleges NDAs have been used routinely in the mining industry to prevent women from speaking out about sexual harassment.

In response, both BHP and Rio Tinto have stated they take all sexual harassment allegations seriously. Both companies also say they no longer use NDAs when dealing with sexual harassment allegations, and won’t enforce past confidentiality terms.

A push to restrict NDAs across the business world is gaining momentum. The Victorian government is currently considering legislation to limit their use.

The effectiveness of any changes will depend on how much they put victim-survivors in the driver’s seat about when – and how – NDAs can be used.

Australian workers are doing it tough. Costs are increasing faster than wages and incomes. Those with less are doing it the toughest.

The Carmichael Centre has prepared this video spotlighting the personal stories of workers navigating the cost of living crisis in Australia.

Read the report Doing it Tough: How Australians are experiencing the cost of living crisis.

On October 17, the Carmichael Centre and the Centre for Future Work hosted a symposium on the living standards and cost of living challenges in Australian themed 'Big Problems Can be Solved: Protecting Living Standards through Investment & Inclusion (not Austerity & Division)'.

Australia’s productivity growth has reverted to the same stagnant pattern as before the pandemic, according to the Productivity Commission’s latest quarterly report.

Productivity is complex and often misunderstood in media and policy debates. So before we read too much into this latest data, here are six key things to understand about productivity.

The Carmichael Centre's Laurie Carmichael Distinguished Research Fellow Emeritus Professor David Peetz and researcher Charlie Joyce spoke recently at the 2024 National Manufacturing Summit in Brisbane on July 31.

Joyce and Peetz argued that with the global energy transition storming ahead - and driving an international boom in clean technology manufacturing - it is more important than ever that Australia act to reposition and restructure our economy to take full advantage of the industrial opportunities of the renewable energy revolution. 

The Albanese Government’s industrial policy framework – the Future Made in Australia Act (FMAA) – has finally been unveiled. A centrepiece of the 2024 budget, the FMAA seeks to realise the Labor government’s aspirations of making Australia a ‘renewable energy superpower’. It is expected to be a key pillar of their re-election strategy. The FMAA and its context must be understood by progressive campaigners to ensure it genuinely advances industrial development, decarbonisation, and the interests of workers.

On 1 July, an important change in the industrial relations landscape came into force. Industrial awards (‘modern awards’, as they’re now called), that set minimum standards in workplaces, will include guarantees of rights for workplace union delegates. All new enterprise agreements must also include such provisions.

This is a result of the first part of the Closing Loopholes Act. Part 1 passed the Parliament in December last year.