Too early to damn Work Choices

Is the Howard government's model of individual work contracts immoral?  Many say yes.  They believe that individual work arrangements destroy the collective and damage "community".

This argument was best explained by the Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, who in his 2005 ABC Boyer lecture series attacked what has been branded as the cult of individualism.

Jensen defines individualism as "the liberal view of ever-expanding choice" but says it is in fact "selfishness masquerading under the grand name of liberalism".

Jensen asserts that individualism causes the decay of unions, clubs, voluntary associations and churches, presenting "as great a danger to our true humanity as the collectivist spirit of Marxism proved to be".

This is the same moral mantra that unions and others use against Work Choices.  They allege it's part of this anti-community liberal view because it moves away from the idea of the labour collective.

The common analysis is that as individuals make free choices in free markets, we mentally and spiritually retreat into self-centred egoism.  Care and passion for others is stripped from our consciousness.  We may become wealthy but material satisfaction equates to barren souls.  We lose the spiritual glue that binds humans.

In this context, the workplace has become a cultural battleground between the opposing forces of community and individualism.

But these ideas are wrong.  They reflect blindness to how community grows from individuality.

Everyone, including Jensen, has a right to promote their moral and spiritual values.  This is good for community.  However the community now has a wide choice of value sets.  These include the value set of the labour collective, which is competing with the idea of individual labour choice.

This competition for ideas is similar to the free market for goods and services.

The consumer in free markets is always each and every individual.  The legitimate and necessary task of leaders is to convince individuals of the value of ideas and to have individuals take those ideas as their own.  The strongest churches, institutions and communities emerge when individuals exercise free choice and adopt moral, spiritual and economic positions because of the power of the ideas.

But when anyone appeals to politicians to apply even subtle policies that limit or manipulate the choices of individuals, they commit a common human folly.

In any market, people will try to create their own patch of monopoly.  Business people will try to block competitors.  Unions will seek to control labour.  Religions will want favour for their morals.  In competitive markets of choice this is natural.  But when any entity looks to government to limit individual choice by promoting one view over another, this is a corrupting of community.

It corrupts because "community" defined by government decree is always a community controlled by government-sanctioned elite individuals.  It distorts community.  The problem with the collective is that it is controlled by elite individuals.

In creating truly strong communities, government must be above appeals for special favour.  Government must give priority to maximising the will of individuals.

Individuals must have maximum freedom to set their own pathways and follow their own roads.  Government sets the frameworks within which we can travel without bumping into each other.  The desires of individuals for personal patches of monopoly must be allowed but monopoly achievement must be frustrated.

These rules of good government are the rules for strong community.  They apply in all matters -- including economic, moral and spiritual.  They contribute to making strong families.  Work Choices presumably targets this objective on employment matters.

But it's no easy outcome to achieve.  Governments are run by humans who suffer from normal human follies and will be seduced by appeals for special favour.

This does not mean that government is or should be value-blind -- quite the opposite.  However the highest value must be placed on maximising the right of individuals to choose.

In many respects, Work Choices is an experiment in enabling individual choice in employment.  Unions claim the choice will happen only for employers.  However the truth is that it's too early to assess whether Work Choices genuinely empowers employee choice.

But the moral basis of Work Choices and individual work contracts is sound.  Community is built from individuality.  This should include choice on work issues.

ADVERTISEMENT