|
Issue No. 140 | 14 June 2002 |
Abbott's Rule of Law
Interview: Party Girl Unions: Touch One, Touch All Industrial: Condition Critical International: Innocence Lost History: Strange Bedfellows Organising: Just Say No Review: Choosing Life Beneath The Clouds Poetry: Did We Make a Big Mistake
Building Workers Gagged By Commission Combet Drives Car Industry Summit Green Ban Protects Aussie Timber Jobs Della Picks Up Manslaughter Baton Billions Of Reasons For Reasonable Hours Swans in Dark as Lights Go Out Workplace Wishes Walked All Over Campaign Steps Up To Stop Child Labor
The Soapbox The Dressing Room The Locker Room Week in Review Bosswatch
Due Credit Tom's Foolery More Latham More Tom
Labor Council of NSW |
Organising Just Say No
****************** Rio Tinto's non-union agreement campaign was all that we had come to expect from an organization that had pioneered union busting in this country in the early 1990's and whose executives had gone on to many other Australian companies to further the sophisticated strategies they first ran in the Pilbara district of WA. The s170LK campaign by Rio was aimed at trying to flee the new and fairer state IR laws that were being proposed by the state Labor government. Laws which would attack the command and control system Rio had so effectively implemented at all of it's WA sites through the use of workplace agreements. The s170LK agreements were no more than a mirror of what they had achieved through workplace agreements at the state level. By Tuesday lunchtime on March 5th, the day after the WA Labour Day long weekend, Rio had hand delivered in excess of 3000 s170LK agreements to the homes of all of it's employees in WA. This was no mean feat given the sheer size of it's operations which stretched as far south to Perth for the fly in fly out workers to Carnarvon, through the Pilbara towns of Pannawonica, Paraburdoo, Tom Price, Karratha, Dampier, Wickham and Port Hedland and onto Kununurra in the far north. The vote was to cover workers from the Rio companies of Argyle Diamonds, Dampier Salt, Hamersley Iron and Robe River. In less than 5 hours the agreements were out and the 14 day count down for the ballot was on. All this achieved without a leak from anywhere that it was going to occur. The only inkling that something may be occurring was the all day management meetings that occurred through all their sites on the Friday before the Labour Day long weekend. By Tuesday mid morning various union officials in the North West and Perth had begun to receive calls from different contacts at the Rio operations that these agreements were on the table. Calls between officials, Unions, the ACTU and UnionsWA resulted in a national phone hook up on Thursday morning where it was decided that we would mount a "No Vote" campaign against the s170LK agreement. That campaign was to start on Saturday March 9th . Thursday and Friday was spent putting together a pamphlet outlining the "No Vote" position which would be the only source of a united message for the first week. Our campaign was to be, by and large, a "third party" campaign because of the short lead time, the internal organization of Rio and the sheer distances that had to be covered in terms of the towns and worksites. This meant that we would conduct morning and afternoon public meetings in all of the towns and sites in the Pilbara and Carnarvon for the Rio companies of Dampier Salt, Hamersley Iron and Robe River. Argyle Diamonds would involve airport, Union office and home meetings in Perth because most of that workforce operates on a fly in fly out basis. While Argyle still had some semblance of union structures there was no union structures at the other three companies at all. At these meeting we would also get out our pamphlet so it would go into the workplace. The message we ran with the workers was that the Labor government was about to introduce new laws that would make the workplace fairer and Rio didn't want that. They wanted a continuation of the control they had in the workplace and were trying to move to the federal system to keep that. Workers should vote no to keep their options under the state system open. If they chose to do that they would lose nothing. Everything would stay as it is. We said they should be informed about what choices they made. Ours was simply an information campaign about what their options were. It was agreed that no officials were to try and recruit workers and most importantly we would present ourselves as a united front. Officials from all of the Unions (AMWU, AWU, CEPU and CFMEU), the ACTU and UnionsWA were involved as was a labour lawyer. Meetings were as much about questions, answers and listening as they were about getting out our clear and precise message. The presentation was as important as the message. These workers, given the recent history of the area, saw a united and coherent Union body delivering a precise and balanced alternative argument. The first round of meetings took seven days and then we had one more round in the few days before the ballot opened. During the second round of meetings we got out a second flyer which was more of a question and answer pamphlet. This was to address more of the specific issues that had been raised in the first round of meetings and combat some of the company's propaganda. We also ran a number of advertisements in the local papers and through the local radio stations. We did letter drops in all of the towns as well as inserting flyers into the main local home delivered paper. Messages of support came from the workers at BHP. A letter from the local ALP member gave support to our position. At each of the meetings we held we also took a list of names and addresses for feedback and follow up. Given that these sites had been deunionised for 9 years now the turnouts were very good. In Tom Price we had just over 220 workers turnout and at Paraburdoo 200. Karratha and Dampier had 180 while Wickham we got 70. There were poor turnouts at Pannawonica and the two satellite sites. What became quite clear as we travelled to the various towns was the amount of heart the workforce took from the successful rejuvenation of the union just up the road at BHP. Many were aware and others wanted to hear what had gone on at BHP to reorganise that company in the face of the same type of deunionisation campaign they had lost some 9 years before. All had friends or had read in the press of the fight back by BHP workers after the well resourced and sophisticated campaign by BHP. And how after nearly three years those workers were on the verge of a collective agreement that was going to deliver a secure future for them, their families and the communities in which they lived. They wanted that future for themselves. In the first six days of Rio's campaign to get up the s170LK agreement the line they ran was that their workplace agreement system was a positive one for both them and their employees providing quite obvious mutual benefits for both parties. This was the public line they had been running since the inception of these agreements in their workplaces. What became quite apparent after our first round of meetings was that an informed workforce was going to cast a no vote in the vicinity of about 80%. These workers were not happy with the current workplace agreement regime and had major concerns around the fair treatment process, the performance review system, the manner in which the company made unilateral changes to hours and rosters, the lack of consultation about change and the all consuming power that management exercised on the job displaying a total lack of respect for the workforce which resulted in a management attitude of ... "if you don't like it here then fuck off because there's plenty more where you came from". With everything pointing to a white wash "no" vote Rio changed it's tune and began to run a campaign based on fear and deceit in the last 5 days before the ballot. Workers were told, incorrectly, by their immediate supervisors that if they voted no they would lose their superannuation entitlements, bonus, medical benefits and education assistance for their children. They were also informed that they would have to go back to the 1987 rates of pay and would risk having their jobs contracted out. Quite a stark contrast to the manner in which they began the s170LK campaign. Despite the above a courageous decision was taken by the majority with the "no" vote getting up at Hamersley Iron, Dampier Salt and Argyle Diamonds. Robe River was the only company to vote yes. This was the only place where we could only get to workers in one of the three sites. At Wickham, where we managed to visit and hold proper meetings, the no vote ran at about 70%. While the result was promising we need to be clear about what it meant. The no vote said two things. Firstly it was a vote of no confidence in the individual contract system. Secondly it was these workers choosing to explore their options under the new fairer laws being proposed by the state Labor government. It was not a vote to move to the union. But it does present the union movement with an unprecedented opportunity to assist these workers to reorganise, and therefore gain some dignity and respect in their workplace. Will Tracey is a joint organiser for 5 unions in the Pilbara working on BHP for the past 18 months and Rio Tinto since the 5th March. In one 18 day period, Will travelled over 10,000 kilometres.
|
Search All Issues | Latest Issue | Previous Issues | Print Latest Issue |
© 1999-2002 Workers Online |
|