Is the ACTU under pressure?

Miss Eagle was forced to ask the question above after reading this. The ACTU is, perhaps, flinching under the fruit of success. It's wonderful Your Rights At Work campaign was central to the Rudd Labor Government's ascent to the reins of power.

We all watched open-mouthed the me-too campaign run by Labor in the lead up to the election. We wondered if this is what really had to happen to come to power and if Rudd would change his public tune when he came to power. Rudd seems set on being a promise-keeper and appears determined not to follow John Howard down the dishonest path of core and non-core promises.

Rudd and Gillard prior to the election were intent on projecting an image that was business-friendly and business wanted what they had got out of Howard. But, as the union movement is set to remind Rud and Gillard, the Your Rights At Work campaign by the ACTU delivered government. People who had never voted Labor before changed their vote. John Howard's Work Choices were, for most people, a bridge too far. Business has to face that fact. After all, they do love the benefits of a democracy governed by the rule of law, don't they?

And why this magic year of 2010 before things can really begin to change - if at all? Rudd had said that this was because business had to make forward plans. But, really, Kevin. A business that does not factor in the "change of government" risk? A business that can't figure out that industrial relations might change with Labor in power?

People are - by year's end - going to want demonstrable workplace change. They really would like it sooner, like right now. But their patience may stretch to year's end. After that, Kevin and Julia, if there is no demonstrable and meaningful change you will be seen as someone who keeps your word - to business but not to ordinary working Australians.

The left unions are restless. The Socialist Alliance - not an organisation brim-full of burgeoning membership - had a State conference here in Melbourne. The Saturday afternoon panel was devoted to the industrial relations scene and the AMWU, Textile, Clothing & Footwear Union, and the CFMEU as well as the Geelong & Region Trades and Labour Council turned up and clearly expressed their points of view.

The contribution of these unions was indicative of what could be a groundswell from the Left. The AMWU with its strong foothold in a declining Victorian manufacturing base clearly wants a return to the previous way of operating including Pattern Bargaining. While the TCFU outlined lucidly the way in which flow-ons have operated in Australia, the AMWU's dream of pattern bargaining is a wish that Miss Eagle predicts will remain unfulfilled. Somewhere, though, between the traditional flow-on practices and the rigidity and targetting of pattern bargaining there could be an opportunity for some new and negotiated thinking.

Traditionally, there have been unions like the AMWU and the Construction Unions who have set the pace. They have used their clout to progress demands and those with less clout - particularly in industries whose workforce is populated by women and the young - have, in time, been able to apply for flow-ons into their own industrial instruments.

However, back in the 1980s the AMWU and the Construction Unions overlooked one very important factor: the service sector. There was a time back then when the service sector was the one area of the economy that displayed marked growth at the same time as manufacturing entered its decline and some areas of construction were in the doldrums.

The AMWU drove through enterprise bargaining. This was a disaster for workers in the service sector such as the retail and hospitality industries. Enterprise bargaining has potential in the tradeable goods area and in construction. The economies of these industries were the meat and milk of the old Industrial Relations Club. The IR Club knew the ins and outs intimately and its people on a first name basis. The service industries were foreign to them - even to the men who ran the trade unions who serviced these industries. No thought had been given to how they operated: their culture, their economic milieu. I'm not sure that this has occurred yet. Draw an AIRC Commissioner into conversation over a coldie and he (very few she-s) would admit his ignorance.

To put it simply, dear Reader, in Enterprise Bargaining one could negotiate efficiencies in this wise:
If the business was making 500 ball bearings per day but efficiencies were negotiated and work practices not currently facilitated by the industrial award were streamlined and 750 ball bearings per day could now be made, then workers could negotiate a share of the increased productivity. Dead easy.

Then you go to the service industries. A check-out operator has no control over the number of customers served; the room attendant has no control over the number of beds made and rooms cleaned; the bar attendant has no control over the number of customers nor beers pulled. And while, in this day and age, it is possible to measure anything. When people do not want to find quantifiable or qualitative data, that data will never be forthcoming - particularly in relation to the work of women. This is why, in the end, Enterprise Bargaining became associated in these industries not with improved productivity but being forced into giving up conditions and working horrible hours without penalty rates. Of course, the more this sort of Enterprise Bargaining became the norm in these industries the fewer people joined trade unions. Mmmmm.....!

So to-day we look at the linked article which seems to be attributed more to Jeff Lawrence (himself from a Left union, the LHMU) than to the Rudd Government. It is interesting that this has come within ten days of the union panel at the Socialist Alliance. Within ten days of the panel at the Socialist Alliance saying that the current position of the ACTU was quite confused; saying that if the ACTU was to mount any sort of campaign it would be months away.

But the revival of the Australian Labour Advisory Council will hardly be a sop to disgruntled unions. This would have been likely to occur anyway. Similarly, union business committees to consult on legislation - as has been advised by Miss E's AWU contacts. This process is always likely under a Labor Government.

What Australian trade unions don't take to kindly is having a Labor government giving business its wish list or giving business an upper hand to the disadvantage of trade unions and, particularly, trade union rights as spelt out in ILO conventions.

And, as you are aware Kevin and Julia, the CFMEU want the abolition of the draconian Office of the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner forthwith.

What were we really thinking? What are Kev and Krew really thinking?

What were we really thinking all through 2007 ...

....as Kevin Rudd topped the polls

....as his me-too-ism made him a small target for the Liberal/National Coalition

....as Kevin and Julia made promises to business about AWAs

....as Kev courted people with religious affiliations who had never voted Labor - ever

....as Bill Shorten of the AWU and Greg Combet of the ACTU trumped pre-selection processes and long standing, faithful sitting members to gain pre-selection and election in safe Labor seats and then rewarded with positions as Parliamentary Secretaries

We - the trade unionists, those who cared about wage and income equity, those who marched for justice - kept putting our views forward persistently. We did not say what we really felt when the ALP policies were watered down into a new reality and The Greens put forward an industrial relations policy we found more understandable. The ACTU did not want to ruffle feathers and merely expressed disappointment.

We were realistic. We wanted Howard and his henchmen and women gone. We knew that this would be a big ask. We understood that Kev and Krew would have to play it cool to get across the line. We were not going to rock the boat. We would stay on message - even if it meant biting the anxious tips of our tongues off.

Kevin got across the line - but, just as Miss Eagle questioned during the campaign the state of Kevin's Spine, she now questions Kevin's gratitude.

There has been much watering down of industrial relations policy in an attempt to mollify business interests. Changes will not be fully in place until 2010.

Let's get frank now, Kev.

You were elected in December 2007. How would it be if we said to you, Kev, "Congratulations, Kev. You've won the election, Kev. You've beaten Howard, Kev. But, Kev, you will not take power until 2010. Until then Howard remains in power and continues to live at Kirribilli. He'll water down his behaviour and his hubris a bit. In fact, he'll try very hard not to use the numbers he has in the Senate to really rock the boat. But, Kev, go away and stay cool until December 2010."

Makes real sense, doesn't it Kev. Highly rational.

In fact, Kev, in 2010 we are due for another election and - if you lose it (I realise it is considered unlikely) - it could be that nothing of lasting consequence will have changed on the industrial front and you will go down in history as Kould-have-been, Kould-have-done Kev.

To my mind, Kev, this seems darned ungrateful and downright rude.

You see, Kev, all those corporations, business people, and corporate councils you mollified or attempted to mollify did NOT turn out the vote for you, Kev. If any of them changed their vote from Liberal to Labor for you, it was precious few and certainly not in tide-turning numbers.

Not like us, Kev. Not like us - the trade unionists, the justice seekers, the footsloggers in march after march. We worked. Agreed - some of us were in targetted electorates with huge support from the ACTU, campaign organisers, and organisations like PolMin. It was these resources - financial, organisational, and human - who turned out the vote for you, Kev. True, some of them - like Miss Eagle - gave their No. 1 to The Greens for their industrial policy while ensuring the final vote went to you. But even so, we turned out more votes for you and made the difference for you in a way that no other sector of the population did - and we did it for at least eighteen straight months.

Your Rights At Work Campaign on Election Day 2007.

So, Kev, guess what? We don't give a fig for 2010. We want industrial change now. We want equity now. We don't give a fig about what you had to say to business because we think your first loyalty is to us and not to them and that there are more of us in the Australian polity than there are of them.

I realise, Kev, that it is a long time since you and Therese felt the need to have the Union help you achieve some sort of justice for yourselves in the workplace. But perhaps you might pause to think how much Unions have helped you to Christmas Dinner at The Lodge. We ask you to think about that Kev, you and your Krew, and you might be a bit indigenous about it. It is pay back time. Time to show recipricocity, recognition and gratitude. Time to be well-mannered and acknowledge how you got to be Prime Minister. Thanks, Kev. Over to you and Krew.

Your Rights At Work Teams Celebrating Kevin Rudd's Victory, December 2007

Spread the word! Shout it out!
Don't let your employer force you into signing an Australian Workplace Agreement (AWA).

This is not just Miss Eagle saying so. This is none other than Nicholas Wilson, the Workplace Ombudsman. That's right. The Workplace Ombudsman. The Workplace Ombudsman set up by the Howard Government.

The WO has said they will go after anyone who is co-ercing employees to sign up to AWAs to try to get in ahead of the ALP Government's proposed legislation. The largest employer trying it on is Telstra, run by those princes of de-regulation, The Three Amigos.

BTW, dear Reader, did you know that Telstra is a substantial corporate funder of that bastion of neo-liberalism, the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA). The IPA hates regulation (and this means it is against awards and for AWAs) probably more than it hates the plague and has been known to publish the odd article or three which is favourable to the de-regulatory point of view of The Three Amigos.

The best thing, dear Reader, is - if you are not yet a member of the trade union relevant to your particular industry - join a trade union to-day. No excuses!

People say but I can't join a union on my own when there's no one else in my work in a union. Not true. You - as an individual - can join a union and no one else need ever know. In fact, you have human rights and part of those human rights is your right to be a member of a free trade union! Don't let anyone deprive you of your human rights.

Think of it this way, dear Reader. Workplace and Industrial Law insurance. You pay for fire and storm and tempest insurance on your home and belongings. Union membership is the most cost effective way to obtain workplace and industrial law advice and assistance.

Union membership is like any other form of insurance. You may pay the premium and may never use its services. In fact, you hope and pray you never have to use its service. But the day you need the union and you aren't a member, you can find yourself in deep trouble.

And you can obtain services from your trade union without ever having to see a trade union official or have one come to your workplace.

Pay your dues and you can get all the information you need to express an articulate point of view to your employer by placing a telephone call. You can give every appearance of being your own representative - but have the full backing of your trade union in providing you with an arsenal of arguments and a stack of suggestions. All without the boss knowing you are a member of a union.

Of course, 99 times out of 100, your boss will be a member of his/her union - namely an organisation of employers for the respective industry. So, if it is worthwhile for your boss to be a member of a trade organisation so he can get information, backing and support, why is it not worthwhile for you?

And, of course, the modern trade union provides a range of additional services. The trade union that used to employ Miss E as a union official had an excellent service for members involved in workcover/workers' compensation issues. Again, the sort of thing you hope never to need - but when you do....

The members who had used this service could not speak highly enough of it. They appeared before boards in the company of the union's legal practitioners - all for free. Something that frequently gave an edge and made the difference in a claim succeeding. Those who needed to go to common law to seek damages needed only to keep their union membership up to date to be represented legally for nix.

And who has protected working people from the ravages of AWAs by campaigning to unseat the Howard Government? The trade union movement across Australia.

And they did this by working with members of the general public - many of whom are not union members or have retired from the workforce and no longer current union members. So a thorough community campaign in conjunction with the union movement has brought crucial votes to the Labor Party to give workers a fair go.

So, give yourself a fair go, dear Reader, and keep your union membership up - and your powder dry.