Workplace relations experts say governments must look beyond strikes and industrial action to address the true causes of workplace conflict.

The Australian Consortium for Research on Employment and Work (ACREW) made the call in a submission to the Productivity Commission inquiry.

ACREW – a spin-off of Monash University’s Business School – argues that it is time to move beyond knee-jerk legislation in response to sectional interests, and open up a wider community debate on what is needed for a better workplace relations system.

“The strike is not the main game here, but it is the most visible. What is more damaging is the pervasive individualised conflicts that lead to huge costs in labour turnover, absenteeism and such,” ACTEW director Professor Julian Teicher said.

“In our most recent national survey of 1400 senior managers responsible for human resources, 82 per cent of organisations reported experiencing at least one individual dispute in the past year. Most commonly these were interpersonal conflicts and disagreements with supervisors.”

On average, respondents spent 10 per cent of their time resolving individual disputes. For organisations with more than 500 employees that meant an average of 14 hours per week.

“Measures such as cutting penalty rates and reducing the protections against unfair dismissal which are being advocated by some interest groups will not enhance organisational performance or employee wellbeing,” Professor Teicher said.

“Ultimately it is up to businesses to build the type of work environment that will maximise employee well being and organisational performance.”

Professor Teicher’s colleague, adjunct research fellow Geoff McGill, says the Commission should be looking at a bigger picture.

“The Productivity Commission needs to make sense of a very large number of submissions, which reflect particular interests and concerns,” said Mr McGill, a former senior executive with Rio Tinto Zinc and the Commonwealth Bank.

“Our submission urges the Commission to take a step up and look at the overall process the Inquiry should adopt in order to promote a policy debate about reforms that can be sustained over the longer term.”