Outcome 4 Effectiveness indicators Data is not provided for deliverables because the administered address legal or administrative issues rather than advancing major government initiatives. The following data is the latest available at the time of writing. Table 2.4B Effectiveness indicators for Outcome 4 December December Comments quarter 2011 quarter 2012 The federal workplace relationship system supports improved productivity outcomes Productivity as 2.3% 2.3% Short term changes in measured by output productivity growth should be per hour worked in interpreted with caution because the market sector quarterly and annual rates of (annual, trend terms) labour productivity are prone to volatile and cyclical effects and data are often revised by the ABS with updated information ABS Wage Price Index 3.6% 3.4% The annual wages growth has (annual, seasonal slowed slightly over the past year adjusted terms) Low incidence of industrial action (allowing for variations in the bargaining cycle) Working days lost per 23.9 26.7 The increase in the dispute rate thousand employees is entirely explained by a (annual WDL/000E) increase in disputes in the combined education and training and health care and social assistance industry Working days lost in Not available 178,800 The ABS did not publish data on federal bargaining working days lost in federal disputes (annual, bargaining disputes for the WDL) September quarter 2011 and the March quarter 2011. As a result the annual 2011 figure is not available Collective bargaining is widely used by employers and employees to negotiate pay and conditions Number of 6865 Fair Work 8225 Fair Work Annual data for enterprise workplaces Act agreements, Act agreements, agreement approvals can be employees had their covering covering 1.036 influenced by industry bargaining pay determined by 903,000 million cycles and should therefore be an enterprise employees, employees interpreted with some caution agreement made approved approved under the Fair Work (12 months to (12 months to Act 2009 31 Dec 2011) 31 Dec 2012)
Outcome 4 Effectiveness indicators Data is not provided for deliverables because the administered address legal or administrative issues rather than advancing major government initiatives. The following data is the latest available at the time of writing. Table 2.4B Effectiveness indicators for Outcome 4 December quarter 2011 December quarter 2012 Comments The federal workplace relationship system supports improved productivity outcomes Productivity as measured by output per hour worked in the market sector (annual, trend terms) 2.3% 2.3% Short term changes in productivity growth should be interpreted with caution because quarterly and annual rates of labour productivity are prone to volatile and cyclical effects and data are often revised by the ABS with updated information ABS Wage Price Index (annual, seasonal adjusted terms) 3.6% 3.4% The annual wages growth has slowed slightly over the past year Low incidence of industrial action (allowing for variations in the bargaining cycle) Working days lost per thousand employees (annual WDL/000E) 23.9 26.7 The increase in the dispute rate is entirely explained by a increase in disputes in the combined education and training and health care and social assistance industry Working days lost in federal bargaining disputes (annual, WDL) Not available 178,800 The ABS did not publish data on working days lost in federal bargaining disputes for the September quarter 2011 and the March quarter 2011. As a result the annual 2011 figure is not available Collective bargaining is widely used by employers and employees to negotiate pay and conditions Number of workplaces employees had their pay determined by an enterprise agreement made under the Fair Work Act 2009 6865 Fair Work Act agreements, covering 903,000 employees, approved (12 months to 31 Dec 2011) 8225 Fair Work Act agreements, covering 1.036 million employees approved (12 months to 31 Dec 2012) Annual data for enterprise agreement approvals can be influenced by industry bargaining cycles and should therefore be interpreted with some caution
deewr_2013-14_outcome_4.docx