Twenty-five housekeepers at Mirvac's Hyde Park Plaza Hotel had been given until Tuesday to sign the individual contracts or face the sack, after they had joined the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union.
But within three hours of the workers striking and setting up a picket outside the city hotel, the company had capitulated and withdrawn the termination threat.
It also undertook not to pursue outsourcing of the housekeeping services without the agreement of the workforce.
In a letter to the LHMU, Mirvac conceded that it was the committed opposition of the employees that had convinced it to change its decision.
Committed Activity
The decision was greeted with joy by the housekeepers, some of whom had been working with the company for 35 years.
It followed a 24 hour period of frenetic activity by the workers and union organisers.
On Thursday night two of the workers had addressed Labor Council and won movement-wide support for their cause. In a moving address, Belinda Murphy told delegates of how she had been pressured into signing a contract while working alone cleaning a room.
Recognising the attack on workers was "as important, if not more so, than the MUA dispute," the Labor Council resolved to back the workers with a 24-hour picket the next day.
A media release was issued late that night, while workers and organisers spent the night preparing placards.
Sydney woke to hear stories of the workers' plight on ABC radio and in the Sydney Morning Herald. Some radio stations crossed live to the picket where workers spoke of their determination to see the issue through.
With TV crews, supporters from other unions and housekeepers from other hotels preparing to converge on the hotel for a midday rally, Mirvac management abandoned its plans, minimising the negative publicity and giving the workers the result they had been seeking.
A Text-Book Example of Organising
Trade Union Training Australia organiser Troy Burton, who worked on the campaign, says the housekeepers' victory is a text-book illustration of the benefits of organising.
"This is a dispute which the workers ran," Burton says. "They did the talking to the media, they organised themselves, they got their colleagues from other hotels to back them."
"If anyone doubts the benefits of organising workplaces, they should take a look at the photos from today."
The deal will apply to the casino's 3,000 workers, working in areas such as waiting, dealing, food and beverage, security and cleaning. It will translate into hourly wages of $60 per hour and up from 8pm on New Years Eve until 8pm New Years Day.
It was reached after the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union surveyed members about what they believed would be fair compensation for working on the party of the millennium.
The LHMU's Jeff Roser says the casino management has recognised that they would need a committed staff and minimal absenteeism in what should be their busiest night in history.
He says the LHMU will now use this deal as a benchmark for other big employers who will reap huge profits on New Years Eve through the efforts of their workforce.
Still Waiting on a Public Holiday
Meanwhile, the NSW Labor Council is still waiting on a response from the Carr Government to their request to declare New years Eve a public holiday.
The request was made amidst concerns that thousands of workers would be asked to miss celebrating the millennium with their families for just a standard rate of pay.
Unlike most New Years Eve, it won't just be the hospitality industry calling on workers. Because of concerns about the Millennium Bug thousands of workers across the city will be asked to monitor computers as the clock ticks past midnight.
With many of these offices in the CBD, unions like the Finance Sector Union are concerned about how workers will be able to get into and out of the city, given that authorities are planning to close the city to traffic.
"We are optimistic that the government will deliver for workers on this issue," Labor Council secretary Michael Costa says.
"In any event, we call on employers to follow the lead of the Casino and agree to remunerate workers appropriately. If they don't they can expect the union movement to organise around the issue."
"This is one night where the workers will be really asked to put in; the least that employers can do is share in some of the profits they will make out of this celebration."
A high-level panel of unionists representing the Labor Council, the Teachers Federation, the Public Service Association, the Australian Services Union and the Australian Workers Union convened a press conference
The avuncular PSA president Maurie O'Sullivan got most of the grabs with his attack on "the duchessing dowagers of the Olympics" taking money which should go to public servants, but the concerns from the unionists were universal.
A Missing Line?
Most concern focussed around the government's decision for the first time to delete the budget item relating to public sector pay rises
Describing the proposition that there would be no extra money for pay rises as "unacceptable", Labor Council secretary Michael Costa said public servants would be looking at increases in line with the private sector average of at least four per cent.
"We would be concerned if public sector workers were expected to subsidise a budget surplus through job cuts or a wages freeze," Costa said.
"At a time when the public sector is being asked to work harder and more professionally than ever, it is not good enough to just ignore public sector pay."
Public sector unions have agreed to coordinate their next wages push under the auspices of the Labor Council for the first time. While unions would be free to negotiate beyond the pay matrix, the co-ordinated approach would ensure a baseline rise for all public sector workers.
Revelations of the size of Police Commissioner Peter Ryan's pay packet will only add impetus to the public sector wages push.
Rallying for Better Services
The Australian Services Union services branch convened a rally with NCOSS the day after the budget to highlight the crisis amongst community service providers.
About 300 social workers voiced their concerns about the impact of government spending decisions in the wake of a member survey showing 50 per cent of workers had to turn people away because of lack of resources.
Alison Peters told the rally that ordinary people were being left out of the budget process.
"The non-government community service sector is in crisis and has been for some time," Peters said. "There is an increased demand for services and resources are stretched to breaking point."
"While the increases for some programs is welcomed they are not enough. The ASU is increasingly concerned about the growing divide between the haves and the have nots.
Peters said the other notable thing about the budget is that Government Trading Enterprises such as Sydney Water and the electricity distributors and public transport authorities are not included in the budget.
"We do know the Government is seeking greater dividends from the GTEs. In state rail there will be less subsidies. This puts increasing pressure on the GTEs to make savings. We know this means more job losses."
Moore on the Budget
NCOSS's Garry Moore addressed the Labor Council's weekly meeting, expanding on his comments from the rally.
Key concerns for NCOSS are:
- DOCS spending budgeted to be $30 million less than last year.
- a $6 million cap placed on foster care
- Juvenile Justice to receive a $5.2 million cut, but to open three new centres.
- $200,000 cut to the Ethnic Affairs interpretation service
- cutting 50 inspectors from the Department of Gaming and Racing
- charging low-income earners a co-payment for using the state Dental Service
For more of Gary's budget reaction see this week's Interview.
by Paddy Gorman
The march was sparked by the recent closure of the Oakdale underground coalmine in NSW with 150 employees robbed of $6.3 million in entitlements.
The Howard Government is frantically ducking for cover as public support for the CFMEU campaign grows. The Union finds itself in the novel position of its campaign being supported by Alan Jones, John Laws and the Daily Telegraph, each of who have given thunderous support to the Oakdale miners.
The CFMEU has called on the Federal Government to strike a one-off 10 cent/per tonne levy on coal production to finance an Emergency Fund to ensure that there are no more Oakdales in Australia�s coal industry.
The purpose of the Emergency Fund is to protect the genuine entitlements of mineworkers like those at Oakdale some of whom have spent a lifetime in the pits while others who have young families are desperately paying off mortgages. We should ensure that no one is ever left facing financial ruin because a mine goes belly up through no fault of the workers.
Tony Maher said that the Oakdale miners would have first claim on the Emergency Fund.
Howard has attempted to dismiss the CFMEU�s call for the 10-cent levy as imposing a further unacceptable cost on coal producers. However, the Union argues that the latest average price (1998) for a tonne of Australian coal on the export market was A$58.12. The 10-cents levy the CFMEU is proposing is a drop in the ocean by anyone�s standard. It is 0.02% of the average price of a tonne of coal.
Coal is Australia�s biggest export earner bringing in $10 billion last year alone.
With Australia producing 222 million tonnes of saleable coal last year, the CFMEU�s Emergency Fund would generate $22.2 million, enough to ensure the entitlements of the Oakdale mineworkers. It would also provide protection for those at other smaller operations hovering precariously on the brink of closure as the huge multinational producers like BHP, Rio Tinto and Shell continue to cut coal prices and drive smaller producers to the wall.
The CFMEU's proposal has won the support of Federal Opposition Leader Kim Beazley who described it as �doable�. The Australian Democrats have also publicly declared their support for the proposal.
However, the CFMEU see this as a short term solution to an immediate problem facing its members in the coal mining industry.
The Union has called for a national scheme to be introduced to protect all workers entitlements.
Australia is the only country in the OECD that does not have a workers entitlements protection scheme!
Addressing the rally in Canberra on Tuesday, Kim Beazley pledged that a Federal Labor Government would legislate for a national protection scheme as a �priority� when elected.
As part of its campaign, the CFMEU is also focussing on Reith�s proposal to abolish the coal industry�s centrally managed Long Service Leave Fund. Indeed, Reith wants to remove Long Service Leave from all awards by buying out, or trading off, existing entitlements.
The CFMEU has pointed out that the only entitlement the Oakdale miners will receive is their long service leave payment. If Reith had had his way, they would have been denied even this.
Prime Minister Howard continues to refuse to meet directly with the Union and representatives of the Oakdale miners.
Following the Canberra rally on Tuesday, CFMEU national leaders and Oakdale miners representatives met with Reith, John Fay and Nick Minchin.
The Union outlined its demands for support for the Oakdale miners and their families. They warned the Government that mineworkers would not tolerate the destruction of the Long Service Leave Fund and they declared the CFMEU�s support for a national scheme to secure all workers entitlements
Reith, Fay and Minchin committed to replying in three weeks.
The CFMEU bluntly told the Federal Government that Tuesday�s impressive demonstration was confined to Union delegates participation.
The Union warned that if these issues are not addressed satisfactorily, we will be mobilising our entire membership and supporters to march on Canberra.
by Dermot Browne
Jennie this week met with over 40 CPSU delegates to help plan their campaign against the 'draconian' 2nd Wave Legislation.
She told delegates that Reith's latest raft of industrial changes would make it easier for employers to coerce workers into agreements that made them worse off and allow employers to put individual contracts into effect before they had been approved.
She also explained that the changes also would impose complicated procedures for postal ballots before strikes could be taken and stop unions entering the workplace unless they had a written invitations.
Public sector workers have expressed particular concern about the proposed changes to paid rate awards, long service leave and superannuation.
During the delegatessession there was a great deal of discussion about the position of the Democrats given that they will hold the balance of power when the legislation is debated in the Senate.
Jennie explained that the Democrats need to be convinced to "just say no".
As well as participating in the wider campaign, CPSU delegates have now agreed to use their contacts in the workplace and the community to urge the Democrats to vote against the new Bill.
For more on the Second Wave see Trades Hall
by HTLee and Phil Davey
If you wish to protest you are now confined to Saturdays and Sundays as weekend warriors.
Organisers of the Anti-GST Rally at Sydney Town Hall on Monday 21 June were refused permission to march from Sydney Town Hall to Prime Minister John Howard's office.
Amanda Tattersal coordinator of the rally was warned by the police she would be arrested if she 'encouraged people to march onto the street.'
The rally was organised by the Anti-GST Alliance and supported by the NSW Labor Council. Over 1,000 people attended, half of them trade unionists. They were not going to be told by the police, City Hall, SOCOG or Macquarie Street they would not be allowed onto the street.
Ignoring the police, the peaceful demonstrators lead by the unionists forced the issue and took to the street. The police tried to push them back to the pavements but were unsuccessful and finally allowed them to proceed to Howard's office.
Had the draconian ruling not been challenged we would have turned the clock back to Joe Byjelke-Petersen's Queensland of the 80s where peaceful demonstrations were banned. Our civil liberties would come under attack and our rights to demonstrate would be curtailed.
We must ensure the heavy handed way the authorities in Alanta 'cleared the city' before the 1996 Olympics will not be repeated here. Any pre-Olympic by-laws or ordinance curtailing our rights to participate in peaceful demonstrations must be squashed.
When questioned who gave the orders to ban street marches from Monday to Friday and under which ordinance the order was given, a spokesperson from Police Minister Paul Whelan said no such orders came from the minister's office. Workers Online was also told the minister has requested a report on this matter.
The SOCOG Board this week overturned ceremony director Ric Birch's decision to import college bands from America and Japan under the weight of widespread community opposition.
But the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance is concerned that Games organisers could be tempted to import other big names overseas acts for Games-related events.
MEAA organiser Megan Elliott says the Games have to provide opportunity for Australian performers.
"With the international spotlight on Sydney, this is a once in a lifetime opportunity to promote all types of Australian culture," she says.
"We would be wanting to see Australian artists given every bit as much support as the Australian athletes."
The union also wants SOCOG to look at the arrangements for those who do participate in the Opening Ceremony.
Elliott says she understands band members will be expected to pay up to $1500 in training and accommodation for the privilege of performing at the Opening Ceremony.
"If these games are really about creating opportunities for Australians on the world stage, there should be a due recognition of their contribution," she says.
by Zoe Reynolds
The landmark decision by an Australian court to award compensation to a foreign seafarer injured on a foreign flagged vessel in an Australian port offers hope to seafarers world wide.
Russian seafarer Nikolai Abramkin was suffering from two serious injuries - a mutilated hand and a mugging. Nikolai was manually winding in the mooring rope on the Alexander Tvardovasky in the Port of Melbourne on June 13, 1996, when the broken winch spun out of control, wrapping the wrist thick rope around his hand and amputating the tops of his fingers. Back in Vladivostok, Nikolai repeatedly refused to sign that he would not sue his employers in the Australian courts. Soon after, in November last year, thugs broke into Nikolai's home and savagely beat him with iron bars. They left him for dead, taking all his identification, seafaring documents and passport, delaying his Australia trip by four months.
"We are not claiming the mugging is related. It may well be entirely coincidental," said Victoria ITF inspector Matt Purcell "But if the aim was to stop the case proceeding it failed, Nikolai is back in Australia and his court case has been successful."
Under Russian compensation law Nicolai received a meagre US$8/week. On June 11 Victoria's county court rejected his employers arguments that Australian law could not apply to a foreign flag vessel and awarded Nikolia $123,000 in damages.
"It sets a new legal precedent," said MUA National Secretary and ITF executive board member John Coombs. "Up until now shipping companies have argued that the law of the ship's flag applies in cases of injury or abuse of seafarers employed on board. In this case a foreign seafarer injured on a foreign flag ship in an Australian port has successfully taken his employers to court under Australian law and won damages. We've now set a precedent so we can pursue rogue shipowners, including the many ships of shame flying flags of convenience, who think they are free to physically abuse or expose their crew to injury, even when the ship is in port. "
Union solicitor Michael McGarvie successfully argued that although Nikolai was a Russian seafarer injured on a Russian flagged vessel, because he was in an Australian port at the time of the accident, he could sue under Australian law.
The precedent is far reaching. Up until now, the world over, shipping companies have argued that the laws of the flag state and only the flag state apply. That is why so many have been getting away with murder, exploitation, sexual and physical abuse on vessels even in Australian waters.
"The fate of thousands of injured seafarers hinges on the Abramkin test case," said Victoria's ITF inspector Matt Purcell. "Our victory sets a precedent. It offers hope for fair compensation for seafarers the world over."
And that is why the International Transport Workers' Federation, in Vladivostok and Melbourne made certain Nikolai got his travel documents and a ticket to Australia.
During the the first hearings in April, Nikolai's former employer, Vladivostok based Far Eastern Shipping Company (FESCO) argued that the ship was still under Russian law at the time of the accident. But the court ruled the case would go to full hearing and ordered FESCO pay Nikolai $600 a week living costs for the six week adjournment.
Nikolai claimed negligence, unlimited damages for pain and suffering, scarring and disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life and sacrificed income. The winch had no crank handle, he was forced to use his hand to help wind in the ropes: "The ship was very old, over 20 years, and poorly maintained," he said. "Everything was broken. No one cared less."
Only that a port worker saw the accident and tipped off the ITF, Nikolai may never had won even the meagre US$8 month compensation under the Russian compensation scheme Matt had tracked Nikolai down in the local hospital, and held the ship up for 72 hours before FESCO agreed to pay Nikolai his US$1,100 wages owing and repatriation costs. Back in Vladivostok the ITF helped Nikolai win US$4000 in compensation and his monthly payment. Nikolai's wage was only US$218 a month compared to the ILO rate of US $1,605/month for an electrician.
With the help of the MUA/ITF, Mr Abramkin sued his employer Russian Shipping company FESCO for alleged negligence, claiming damages for pain and suffering, scaring and disfigurement, loss of enjoyment of life and sacrificed income. "The ship was very old, over 20 years, and poorly maintained," he said "Everything was broken. No one cared less."
Union lawyer Michael McGarvie, a partner with Holding Redlich, said the court decision was a significant legal breakthrough for the thousands of foreign seafarers who work in Australian ports each year. "This decision sends a warning to foreign operators that they must abide by our rules when they enter our waters."
He said the case also sets a precedent for other countries with a common law tradition, including the UK, South Africa, North America New Zealand, Malaysia, Hong Kong.
Party members and trade union representatives will converge on Goulburn this weekend to debate how the Labor Government is looking after regional NSW.
Both the AWU and the CFMEU have put forwarded a raft of resolutions calling for a more active government presence.
Australian Workers Union secretary Russ Collison says his country members will be sending Macquarie Street a clear message that regional NSW needs to get a better share of government services.
Collison says the proposed social audit is one way of ensuring that coutnry NSW gets its fair share of government resources.
And the CFMEU has propososed a resolution endorsing the social audit which has already been accepted by the Party's Rural Affairs Commitment.
Newcastle Unions Speak Up
Unions from the Hunter region also plan to make their presence felt, the AWU Newcastle Division secretary Kevin Maher foreshadowed a heated deabte on the impact of budget cuts in his region.
Maher told this week's Labor Council meeting that 450 jobs would be lost from his area, a move that would have a dramatic impact on the whole community. He expects jobs to be lost in State Forests, National Parks and Wildlife, the RTA and the Department of Land and Water Conservation.
He says that while unions have been working hard to recruit ALP members in the bush, this week's state budget is likely to lead to some resignations. "I don't know what we should do with this mob," he said
by Brenda Finlayson
Ms George was addressing 80 people who met in Melbourne last week to mark the 30th anniversary of the historic equal pay for equal work decision in the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Commission on June 19, 1969.
Jennie George told the EMILY's List and Union Women gathering that the award system had been a major protector of women, but was under challenge by the regime of Workplace Relations Minister Peter Reith.
"We will be calling on women and women's organisations in the next few months to get your views through to the Senate inquiry, to protest to the Democrats who will have the balance of power on this issue, to say no to further deregulation of the labour market," she said.
Ms George also warned young women not to take for granted the achievements on pay and conditions that had been won by hard struggle.
The former Premier of Victoria and co-convenor of EMILY's List, Joan Kirner, said the Labor Party in 1998 won back and gained on the women's vote it had lost at the previous federal election, turning the gender gap around by 4%.
"That was because we pre-selected women the voters wanted to elect," she said. "We had policies that working-class women wanted. If anybody thinks we are going back to a position where women are secondary to men's view in the party, they've got another thing coming."
EMILY's List Australia is a political network aimed at increasing the number of women Labor MPs in Federal, State and Territory parliaments. In just over two years, EMILY's List has helped 23 new Labor women candidates into parliament, attracted more than 1600 members and contributed over $240,000 to election campaigns.
EMILY's List supports equity, diversity, choice, and childcare. EMILY is an acronym and stands for Early Money Is Like Yeast - it makes the dough rise. Early money is often the most important initial support a candidate can have when heading into an election.
CUSTOMER SERVICES/ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT: $30 000 p/a
The Labor Council of New South Wales is seeking a highly motivated, energetic and well organised person with excellent communication skills to work in our newly established Organising Centre for twelve months.
This person will be required to promote the benefits of unions and their services as well as working closely with these unions and their solicitors. The role will also require the person to develop and maintain systems for the referral and monitoring of individuals who contact the centre.
ESSENTIAL:
DESIRABLE:
Understanding of the NSW Industrial Relations and Occupational Health and Safety Acts.
Applications including full curriculum vitae should be forwarded in writing by fax or E-mail by 5 July 1999 to:
E-mail: mailt:[email protected]
Facsimile: (02) 9261 8982
Sir or Madam,
Has Labor lost the plot? My opinion is the Labor Party for twenty years haven't had a plot to lose. The failings of the Labor Party are just not in the area of policy.
Many of the Labor ELITE'S have made them selves very rich "Thank you very much "on the backs of the die hard rank and file members of the Labor Party and of course the union movement, maneuvering there way into State and Federal Parliaments.
Suffice to say with the scandal of business dealings and travel rorts they do not represent the Working Class, any more than the Liberal Party. To think that these ELITE'S can earn more money from travel expenses than an average man/women working in a factory some where beggars belief.
I could go on about the Superanuation Schemes etc etc, but the Working Class are no longer buying it. It was obvious from the last election that the Labor Party is in decline.
The present Government is in my opinion the most evil bunch of mis-fits to grace the floors of Parliament House, and there agenda for the Working Class has only just started, however things will have to get much worse before the Labor Party will return to power. If and when they do, the real test will be if any reforms are made to reverse the draconian policy's of the Liberal Party. I think not.
I would like to think that the Labor Party will revert back to it's Working Class roots, but as they have embraced the Global Economy and New World Order with such zeal, the only outcome will be more of the same Capitalist anti Working Class policy's. One has only to look to the U.S.A and other Western Country's to see how the new Global Economy agenda is driving thousands of workers out of there jobs, and the employers looking to the cheap labor markets of Mexico etc.
I have been a Socialist since I started work and I still subscribe to Socialist Ideals, however those ideals do not include the Hawk's, Keating's, Richardson's, Hayden's, Crean's, Kernot's, and other's of their ilk who have broken the heart's of the TRUE BELIEVERS.
Regards Phill.
There has been much debate and discussion in recent years about tax reform. However there is one major issue in the taxation area that has been overlooked. That is, should the payment of taxation to governments be compulsory?
People are often forced into paying taxation, usually by compliant employers deducting it directly from workers wages and sending the money off to the federal tax office. Generally when workers start a new job they are pressured into signing authorities for this to occur even though they really do not want to. Now the federal government is to force the payment of taxation through shopkeepers.
It is well overdue for there to be a greater degree of freedom for the people of Australia and for a higher level of accountability for state and federal governments. Most people are well and truly sick of the stand over tactics of governments and the interference by them in their basic freedoms. For far too long governments have in this area enjoyed a privileged position protected from the disciplines of competition.
People should be free to choose whether or not they will pay taxation to state of federal governments. To protect this freedom of choice special laws should be introduced at both the federal and state level that includes heavily penalties for breaches. To be even handed and fair, the penalties should apply both to the victimisation of those who voluntarily choose to pay tax as well as those who choose not to pay tax.
As a part of the reform process the government should set up an Office of Taxation Advocate to police the new laws. The OTA could also conduct surveys on peoples attitudes on such aspects as compulsory taxation and on whether they think the government gives them good value for their tax dollar. OTA should run major media campaigns to inform people of their new rights to voluntary taxation.
If introduced the freedom of choice and competition will force the state and federal governments to maximise their efforts and performance. If they do a good job by running the country or the state effectively and behaving properly in parliament people will no doubt happily pay taxes. If they do not do a good job people will find alternative providers for the services the want.
Tax is of course in practice is largely optional for the rich and large companies. They unfortunately exercise that option a pay little tax. Average PAYE workers should have the same freedoms.
Labor Council should actively campaign for this new freedom. It will no doubt receive widespread support throughout the community.
The rally organised and supported by the Labor Council, the National Union of Students, the Anti GST Alliance and the Combined Pensioners today in Sydney was fantastic.
Unfortunately the cops arrested a few people after we refused their request to stay off George Street.
This didn't stop us marching to Howard's and the Democrats offices to show our disgust with the GST. One of the loudest chants was 'workers and students-NO GST!'.
Why is it that at this crucial stage, when workers, students, indigenous peoples, pensioners and environmentalists are at their most unified, with a common enemy wreaking havoc all over Australia, we have people in the Labor movement suggesting that this is the wrong path to tread.
I am a student and working member of the LHMU. There are countless examples of people in similar situations. My brother, a construction worker, is a member of the CFMEU and is a committed environmentalist.
As Jenny George said at the rally, the rich are getting richer but the poor are getting the picture. We're unifying, slowly.
Why divide such a powerful movement? Why attack free education as a 'middle class subsidy' when the strongest supporters of free education, the National Union of Students, are showing such strong support for the aims of the Labor movement, indeed most of them are involved in the Labor movement, as members?
Who is behind the newest example of the old 'divide and rule'.
Luke Whitington
Dear Editor,
I am the Local Controller for the Randwick State Emergency Service (SES). As you are well aware, many homes and businesses were heavily affected by the devastating hail storm that hit the eastern suburbs of sydney on Wednesday April 14 1999.
I would like to take this opportunity, in thanking all the Council Staff from Randwick City Council, for their outstanding committment and devotion in responding to the storm.
Together, SES and other Emergency Staff worked hand in hand with Council Staff and Management in delivering goods to troops in the field, organising Volunteers from the community in a major sand bagging operation (in total 280,000 sand bags were filled), and assisting in the operation of the Local SES Headquarters, and establishing the initial Disaster Recovery Centre.
I was over whelmed with the response, and now I can easily state that Local Government can work together with the SES in times of emergencies and disasters.
Three cheers to Randwick Council...
GAYE CAMERON (JP) MAIES
LOCAL CONTROLLER
by Peter Lewis
Now that the dust is settling, what is you evaluation of the first budget of the second Carr government?
Simply, we think the priorities are wrong in the current budget mix. Business and those better off get a better deal than lower income groups and people who are disadvantaged within the community. We do think there's some evidence that the government has listened in the past few weeks to various interests: union, community and other and probably did ignore some of the advice coming from Treasury and so we didn't see the huge slash and burn budget that some people were expecting.
What are some examples of them listening?
For example, the Area Assistance Scheme in the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning was slated for removal. That didn't happen. The number of job cuts in the Aging and Disability Department were expected to be far greater than the 37 that have gone. In Health certainly five weeks ago there was not going to be a $300 million increase, though of course most of the increase is in capital programs for hospitals and in fact the amount of money to run those hospitals just isn't there in terms of the recurrent budget. So there are some examples of things that were definitely on the cards that we clawed back in the past five weeks and to that extent the government is to be commended for having some sense.
The other general comment is that it's tragic that unemployment gets stuck at 6.75 per cent for the whole year. Michael Egan talked during the election campaign of it being down to four per cent within a year of the Olympics finishing and I think the chances of that happening are zero at the moment. So having simply given away a general payroll tax cut without targeting those tax cuts to firms which would providejobs in parts of Sydney and regional NSW where unemployment is 10 per cent or more, it continues to fail to deliver the benefits of economic growth to the most disadvantaged in the community.
Of course, the Labor Government would argue that by cutting business costs they're actually helping create jobs because there's more money to spend on labour. What's wrong with that argument?
The problem is that while that is true in general terms, unless you are much more interventionist with what you do with the tax system, industry policy and regional policy, you just don't get the benefits going to the groups in the community who are most in need. It's simply leaving it the market and hoping that the trickle down will trickle down far enough. It never does.
What's NCOSS's view of governments running budget surpluses?
We don't have a problem in principle with a budget surplus being run. the question is the size of the surplus and what we do with the other levers of the budget at the same time. For example this budget in fact cuts spending in real terms right across the budget; there is about a 6.6 per cent cut. With revenue going gangbusters with good economic conditions predicted for a few more years and a lot of the Olympics paid for on the construction side, we think there was no end justification not to increase spending. So to boast of a $214 million surplus we think was the wrong priority. It could have been $50 million or $100 million, and all the little cuts that have happened needn't have happened.
Let's imagine that Garry Moore through some quirk of fate became Treasurer of NSW. How would your budget have been different?
Firstly on the spending side, we would have looked at a boost to broadly 'human services'. It would have been focussed on regions of NSW where it is clear without even any detailed work, that services are simply not up to the state average or have been declining in recent times. We wouldn't have cut land tax rates, we would have kept those and we would have restructured land tax even further to make it more equitable so that the higher value properties would have paid more than the 1.75 per cent rate for property over $1.2 million. Given the Commonwealth has given NSW an extra $165 million for services and infrastructure, we would have spent that on services and infrastructure and not on payroll tax cuts. And, as I've mentioned, we would have cut payroll tax strategically.
We would have run a smaller surplus, we would have still run one, but it would be smaller. We would have looked at trying to make the beginnings of an attack on our reliance on gambling revenues. that would have meant broadening the base of stamp duty collections and conveyances for housing worth more than $1 million; because we have a philosophy that those better off in the community should be paying a little bit more. And we would have foreshadowed an approach to a social audit in NSW which, if we are ever going to get the right levels of services in the right places, government such has got to do. So although we do have some differences with the Labor Council of NSW on what would be in that total package, we think the idea of a social audit is important to start pursuing.
It seems like NCOSS comes out each year at budget time running the same arguments. Does it ever get frustrating?
Of course it does when you think that with a Labor Government at a state level with an economy which has had eight straight years of growth that more could be done. I've got to say in the life of the Carr Government there have been some good things that have happened. We acknowledge there have been some spending increases in important areas. The problem is that the levels of social need in our community and the complexity of it continues to rise and outstrips the pace of government spending.
It's also frustrating that while you start to see inside state governments a better approach to collaboration, it is still so embryonic. There's so much more that can be done to get government departments together to look at better linkage of services, to have a better relationship between the government sector and the non-government sector, so that you can do more in places like Liverpool and Fairfield and towns west of the Divide which have been ravaged by structural change. So there's some failure to actually look at what we would consider sensible social policy reform.
Do you think the annual fiscal cycle is an impediment to more long term thinking?
It is, when there's so much weight placed on one year's Treasury process. We have fixed four year terms in NSW so in a sense you have a horizon which is guaranteed. it might not be long enough to effect fundamental change, but four years isn't bad. We produce budgets with supposed four year estimated but these always seem to change every year. So if we have the time length and we have the potential for the planning tools and if we can get the agenda right in the first year, we should be able to overcome this problem.
How would you replace the annual budget? A budget every four years?
We're talking about taking seriously the estimates over four years. Reviewing it every year, but not trying to place the focus on doing the whole damn lot every 12 months. Sure, economic cycles change, but they don't change that quickly and you can still at budget time make some changes if you need to in the event of some external event. It's just throwing all your eggs into the same grab bag each year. It would be better to have medium term forecasts, stick to an agenda, review it every year but not turn it upside down each year. Therefore,. the opportunities for long-term planning don't get realised because the budgetary cycle determines
the ups and downs in between.
The social audit being promoting by the union movement is a step in the direction of setting a more long term agenda. You've said that you support the concept but you have differences over some of the specifics. What are they?
To properly do a social audit you've got to have some credible ,measures of social need on a locational basis. you've got to be sure that all the departments adopt a common approach to this , so they don't each use a different set of statistics. But the next crucial step, which is where these things always fall down, is that you've actually got to work out what is an acceptable minimum basket of services that a community needs. it's not simply a matter of saying that it looks like the eastern suburbs of Sydney has more health services per capita, so we'll just rip it out of there and send it to Blacktown or Dubbo. We're not arguing that there should be redistributing but you've got to do it on the basis of knowing where the inequities are and saying this is the minimum level that everyone must have. Then you do the redistribution. The difficulty politically is that government freak out and say there's not enough resources in the total cake, but if we are going to be genuine about this we have to take all of the steps. because if we simply say we'll rob Peter to pay Paul the thing will fall down.
Doesn't the same argument apply if you were to decide you needed to raise taxes to provide services and therefore cut employment?
The question is what sort of taxes to you look at raising? Not all taxes have negative employment impacts. That's why a tax like land tax if appropriately levied, is a progressive tax on speculative capital gain, it doesn't have an impact on the construction industry, particularly in a boom market. You should be looking at these sorts of levers to raise revenue. The question about taxation is picking the taxes which are efficient, which are equitable and which don't have negative job impacts and then making a commitment to actually spend that money on services. That's the next big question. When Carr and Egan introduced the land tax and the bed tax in 1997 - both of which were NCOSS proposals - the unfortunate thing was that they didn't spend that money on increased services for homeless people; which would have been more sensible and saleable to the public. not that we're for hypothecated taxes, but if we're going to levy rich people who are making a motza out of Sydney's property market, we should refocus to the people being turned away from refuges.
Finally, what role do you see unions taking in working co-operatively with the community sector over the life of the Carr government
We have a lot to offer each other in trying to work out a joint vision. Both sectors are interested in jobs and services - perhaps unions more the former and NCOSS more the latter. So we should be building an agenda. the second thing is that we can work on issues together that come under that agenda to promote new initiatives or try and stop regressive policies. My own view is that if we have a two term Labor Government, we're talking eight years, so there is an opportunity - notwithstanding that we might get an economic downturn in a few years time - to make that agenda out that far and to work together particularly in the interests of low-income people who increasingly are people without work or with little work in the restructured labor market.
by Mark Hearn
The AWU has always been the traditional union for the bush and has recently committed increased resources to ensure its workers are getting what they need. According to AWU National Secretary Terry Muscat, the AWU's widely based regional structure allows it to successfully focus on the needs of country workers.
The AWU's regional membership is diverse and includes many seasonal workers, where casualisation rates are high. Recently, the AWU was successful in their fight to increase the casual loading in the grain industry. The AWU's argument to increase the casual loading from 15% to 23.3% was upheld in the Industrial Relations Commission and is part of a long term strategy to increase casual loadings for all workers in predominantly casual industries.
In the fruit picking, packing and vegetable growing industry where casualisation rates are very high the AWU has commenced a campaign that will increase loadings and provide better job security. The campaign has commenced at the grass-roots level where the union is talking to members and surveying the industry into the reasons for the high rate of casual employment.
"The AWU has opened up more regional offices in recent years so that we can reach our membership. The organisers have a much better appreciation of what matters to country workers," said Mr Muscat.
NSW Branch Secretary Russ Collison agrees. "In NSW we have set out a specific campaign to ensure workers know their rights, know where to go for help and most importantly we have commenced a pro-active campaign to blitz employers who are disregarding the health and safety of our members by offering sub-standard working conditions."
The AWU has already commenced it's blitz by targeting shearing sheds. "It seems a popular myth that workers in the country can work in sub-standard conditions that would never be tolerated by city workers," said Russ Collison. "We're talking about basic conditions such as adequate washing and toilet facilities - this is just not acceptable as we launch into the 21st century. Some farmers say they cannot provide adequate conditions due to financial hardship and that the AWU is not looking at the big picture. We argue that all workers are entitled to basic rights".
The AWU intends to prosecute offending employers. Stage one has commenced in the shearing industry where the union is already circulating shed reports to members and delegates. The reports will enable the AWU to focus on the worst offenders.
The AWU has opened up communications with its regional members. It recently re-established the Pastoral Worker, which is circulated to members in the Pastoral industry. At the AWU's recent Delegates Pastoral Conference, the AWU resolved to pursue portable long service leave for pastoral workers, fight for the National Shearing Code to be enshrined in legislation and to set up strategies to protect rates of pay and conditions against Peter Reith's attack on the Pastoral Award.
The AWU will also be distributing The Rural Worker which will focus on the needs for regional workers including those in the fruit picking industries, mining industries and road construction.
The Australian Workers Union has appointed a National Rural & Regional Co-ordinator as part of its commitment to regional Australia. "The Federal government's push for individual contracts has spread rapidly to the bush where workers are much more isolated," said Peter Smith. "Recently the NSW Branch pursued an unfair dismissal claim for a shedhand who was dismissed after he refused to sign an individual contract. With this sort of pressure being put on workers, the AWU is determined to make sure we have a strong national and united approach," he added.
by Tony Morison
Brussels June 23 1999 (ICFTU OnLine): The ICFTU's Steering Committee, the organisation's highest policy-making body, is demanding that all individuals accused of war-crimes, or crimes against humanity or acts of genocide committed in the Balkans, and wanted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) be brought to justice immediately.
"This should be strenuously pursued by the international community, particularly international peace-keeping forces in the Balkans, including those from the Russian Federation, as a necessary step to rebuilding peace and stability in the region", says the ICFTU.
The ICFTU Steering Committee meeting in Brussels yesterday, also requested the ICFTU General Secretary to promote a Balkan trade union reconstruction programme in close association with the ETUC, TUAC and the ITS's and in co-operation with the ILO, engaging the Bretton Woods Institutions in efforts aimed at ensuring a full social dimension in the reconstruction programmes.
The unions say that it is crucially important to strengthen the institutions of civil society, as the most effective way of preventing conflict, and creating good governance and social practice, items which were largely ignored in the transition process of Central and Eastern Europe, and may have contributed to the growth of conflict in the region.
A courageous first step has been taken towards reconstruction in the region itself by the "Appeal for an Amnesty" launched on June 17 by the ICFTU affiliate in Serbia, the democratic trade union UGS Nezavisnost, and 46 non-governmental organisations in Belgrade. The Appeal called for the return of all those who have fled the country during the bombing campaign, and the adoption by the Yugoslav parliament of a Bill for an Amnesty Law. The Law would grant amnesty in all criminal procedures, on-going trials or sentences passed on people who refused to take part in the war, as well as those guilty of war-related criminal political acts, with the exception of war-crimes.
The ICFTU Steering Committee noted that the international community had largely chosen to ignore calls made since 1990 from trade unions and human rights organisations in the area about the deteriorating situation, despite numerous ICFTU representations to governments, the UN the ILO, and other international organisations as witnessed in the ICFTU's report on "Dismissals and Ethnic Cleansing in Kosovo", released in October 1992;".
At the same time, independent trade unions in the region, such as the UGS Nezavisnost in Belgrade, and the BSPK in Kosova have continued to fight to preserve trade union freedoms.
The Brussels-based ICFTU represents 124 million workers through 213 nationaltrade union centres in 143 countries.
by Erik Eklund
From the turn of the century increasing maritime trade between Australia and Europe brought many Swedish seamen to South Australian shores. In the small outports of Port Pirie, Port Germein and Port Lincoln, and in the largest port in the state, Port Adelaide, Swedish seamen between ships or looking for better paid jobs, sought work on the wharves or in local industries, some of them choosing to stay permanently in the new country. This paper will argue that the nature of this type of 'seamen's migration' over the period 1890 to 1930 can be best understood with respect to labour demand and supply in South Australia ports, and the wages and working conditions of the international shipping industry.
In common with nearly all of the waves of migration to Australia economic opportunities and job prospects to a large extent determined the location of settlement. Through their close proximity with the waterfront labour market, and their affinity with the kind of labour it offered, the decision by Swedish seamen to locate in port towns was an obvious one. The experience of Swedish seafarers supports general studies of migration to Australia that note the importance of economic opportunities. However, given their small numbers and at times temporary residence here in Australia, the next step in the process for most migrant groups - chain migration - rarely eventuated. As such the ebb and flow of Swedish migrants and itinerant workers can be best understood with reference to the demand for labour in the ports they frequented. By focusing on the economic context and motivation for particular migration choices I do not wish to underestimate other factors, however, the weight of evidence does indicate that economic factors, both in South Australia and Sweden, played an important role for this particular group of migrants workers. This paper will also include a discussion of temporary workers, that is those Swedes who decided for whatever reason to return to Sweden or return to life at sea. This group had an important role in the South Australian labour market, particularly in times of labour shortage, yet are difficult to follow in the historical record because they rarely came to the attention of Government officials and census takers. The availability of employment records for seamen entering South Australian ports goes some way to remedying this lack of statistical information, and indicates that the Swedish impact in South Australia was far greater than the modest census figures suggest.
Industry Context
To fully appreciate the lives of these Swedish seamen, and their involvement in land-based labour markets in Australia, we need to briefly review the shipping industry in this period for this was the industry that brought them to Australian shores. A seamen's working life, whether on the newer tramp steamers that became more common at the end of the nineteenth century, or on the sailing ships which continued trading with Australia up to the 1940s, involved lengthy periods away from home. Steamers could manage the trip from English ports to the Southern Coast of Australia in about 60 to 70 days by 1900. Sailing ships took approximately 85 to 100 days. Loading time depended on the state of facilities at port, and the type of cargo. Loading grain in some of the small ports of South Australia could take up to three weeks, and the wait was often longer if other ships had arrived in port beforehand. The grain trade between these small ports to mostly British destinations and buyers deserves further attention since this was one of the principal trades carried out by Swedish and �land-based lines, most famously of course by the Erikson line, owned and operated by Gustaf Erikson. The general arrangement of this trade, and the nature of the crewing, gives us some insight into other Swedish vessels that came to South Australia in this period.
Erikson, a wilely entrepreneur and experienced sailor himself, had begun buying up old German, French, American and British sailing vessels from 1914. Erikson was born on �land and served his apprenticeship on other ships owned by his countrymen. By reducing crew sizes, and by securing reliable vessels for almost the price paid for scrap, he was able to operate these apparently technologically outdated ships in a profitable fashion through the first half of the twentieth century, despite the dominance of steam on nearly all other major trade routes. The key was to find a commodity that was not perishable, and whose demand was not seasonal, which was located on routes suitable for sailing ships. The grain trade from South Australia was ideal in all respects. Ships could sail to the South Atlantic, round the Cape of Good Hope and ride the swells of the Southern Ocean, and the winds of the Roaring 40s to Spencer Gulf in South Australia. There they had a choice of small outports, all characterised by fairly primitive port facilities. This was important since modern loading facilities gave steamers a further advantage which was nullified, to some extent, by their absence in these small ports. By no means all of the trade was the province of sail, but Swedish and �land ships carried the bulk of it well into the 1930s. In 1921, 68 square-rigged ships left South Australia for Europe with grain as cargo, though by 1938 this number had been reduced to 17.
The grain ships timed their arrival with the summer harvest in South Australia, around Christmas time. Waiting for a berth, and loading usually meant that they left Australia for Falmouth, England in late January or February. From Falmouth the ship's captain would take orders as to the cargo's final destination which was typically London, Liverpool, Belfast or Glasgow. If the ship had failed to secure any further cargoes then the Erikson line ships would return to Mariehamn arriving in July or August for minor repairs and lay up. As a consequence, the Erikson fleet employed a large number of �landers. In 1928 the Herzogin Cecile had a crew of twenty six men which included fourteen �landers, six Swedes, three Finns, three Germans, one Englishmen and one Australian. In 1930, Parma carried a crew of 30 which included fifteen Finns (probably all �landers), eleven Germans, two Australians, one American and one Englishman.
Despite the appeal of the sailing vessels and the Erikson fleet in particular, there were probably more Swedish mariners employed on Swedish and Norwegian steamers operating between Europe and Australia. The largest Norwegian line was Wilhelm Wilhelmson, which had approximately fifty vessels by the late 1920s. In Sweden the Transatlantic Line operated a direct route from Sweden to Australia. Many seamen secured work not only on these Scandinavian lines but on ships registered in a number of different countries. Nevertheless the number of Scandinavian registered ships on routes to Australia would have provided greater opportunities for Scandinavian/Australian movement. In 1924/5 Norwegian and Swedish-registered ships together carried 8.5% of the total tonnage of cargo leaving Australian ports. By 1928/29 this figure had increased to 13.3%. Typically these ships carried cargoes of guano (fertiliser) from Chile, or occasionally Baltic Timber to Australia, while the key Australian exports of coal and wheat dominated the outward bound cargo. Exports from Sweden to Australia also increased during this period. The value of exports such as wood products, farm machinery and manufactured goods, among other things, increased from less than �250,000 in 1905 to average approximately �2,000,000 in the 1920s, but in many cases ships came to Australia in ballast only. These maritime links, on the basis of both a general trade between Europe and Australia and specifically Swedish/Australian trade, brought increasing numbers of Swedish seamen to Australian ports. The most important Australian ports for this trade included Brisbane, Newcastle (New South Wales), Sydney, Port Melbourne, Port Adelaide and Fremantle.
South Australian Context
South Australia was founded as a colony of the British empire in 1836 after enabling legislation had been passed by the British parliament in 1834. The colony developed as an important grain growing region, particularly from the 1870s as new agricultural areas were developed with the support of government-built railway lines that ran from small ports towns to inland regions. Despite some industrial development which followed the major discoveries of tin and copper ore in the 1840s (with further discoveries of copper in the 1860s), the colony's labour market remained predominantly rural. The need to move grain to market, however, did create some employment in the transport and waterfront sectors. This work was highly seasonal in nature and peaked in late spring and summer (November, December, January) as the grain was harvested and brought to market. Likewise in the colony's few industries labour demand was also intermittent and depended on variables such as the weather, the selling price of key commodities such as copper, lead and zinc, the availability of shipping, and the extent of the year's harvest. As a consequence the rural, industrial and transport sectors of the economy exhibited a highly volatile demand for labour. Throughout this period many employers often experienced difficulties in securing adequate numbers of workers. In this context itinerant workers such as seamen were well-placed to fill any short term labour demands, especially since this demand commonly came from waterfront-based industries.
Swedish workers and migrants
This was an important overall context for the movement of Swedish seamen in and out of the South Australian labour market. The demand for waterfront labour can be seen as the key factor that attracted workers to particular areas in the colony/state. The nature of seafaring work has often meant that seamen changed jobs between sea and land and commonly swapped ships as well. The extent of casualisation was encouraged by a number of factors in the organisation of work. During lay periods at port, seamen were often 'paid off' by owners in an effort to reduce running costs and the overall wages bill. Vessels in Australian ports could wait for up to three months on some occasions to secure a cargo.
This practice also encouraged, indeed required, seamen to find alternative sources of employment on other vessels or on shore. The tendency to change jobs was especially true of younger seamen. They had fewer familial ties and were more likely to look for better opportunities or simply new challenges than other workers. Older seamen preferred more stable employment often closer to home in order to meet their familial obligations. In the case of the Swedes who came to South Australia they were overwhelmingly composed of younger men between the ages of 18 and 25, for it was this group who were the main source of employment on deep sea vessels.
The combination of periodic high demand for labour in the South Australian economy, and periods of irregular employment for seamen made legal discharge, or desertion a common experience for seamen calling at South Australian ports. From 1894 to 1915, for example, Swedes shipped or discharged in South Australia accounted for 6.71% of all seamen, well behind the percentage of British sailors at 71.06%, but higher than any other national group with the Norwegians (at 5.02%) and Germans (at 4.03%) the next closest groups. Therefore, Swedes were the largest group of non-British foreign nationals over this period in the state.
Wages and working conditions
One of the key factors influencing these seamen to desert or to be officially 'paid off' from their foreign vessel in Australian ports was the relatively higher wages paid to Australian workers, both land and sea based. The most readily available information on the wages of Scandinavian seamen comes from the numerous published sources on the Erikson fleet, but this would be a reasonable indication of wages for Swedish seamen not employed by Erikson and working on sailing ships. Seamen on steamers, however, were generally better paid. In the 1910s and 1920s apprentices on Erikson square riggers were signed on for four years and received food and accommodation from the employer. The family of the apprenticeship also received �25. After finishing their apprenticeships Ordinary Seamen earned approximately 450 FM or �2 per month, while Able Bodied seaman earned 550 FM or �2 10s per month. These relatively modest wages have to be balanced against the free provision of food and accommodation (such as it was) and the absence of any land-based distractions to spend money on. Long periods at sea represented lengthy periods of enforced savings since seamen had very little to spend their money on. Working conditions varied considerably according to the ship, the weather and the Captain. At ports located near major trading routes seamen also faced the widespread practice of 'crimping', which involved the illegal and forced supply of labour to unscrupulous Captains or labour agents. Many men, after being plied with alcohol in port side bars and boarding houses, woke up only to find themselves aboard a ship that had already left port.
For workers in South Australia, wages in shipping and in land-based industries varied considerably yet on the whole they were far more attractive than the wages of Swedish and �lander seamen. Before the major defeat of the colonial unions in the 1890 Maritime strike, the Adelaide Steamship Company, the largest single employer of seamen in South Australia, was paying up to �5 per month for experienced men, plus board and rations. These wages dropped appreciably following union defeats and an economic depression of the early 1890s, and a prolonged drought for much of the rest of the decade, but showed some signs of recovery in the late 1890s. In 1898 an unskilled labourer in Adelaide earned 6s a day, or approximately �6 per month if the work lasted. A seamen with a trade such as a carpenter (and many of the �land seamen, for example, had experience in ship building) could earn 9s a day or approximately �9 per month. These rates varied according to the size of the South Australian wheat harvest, the extent of Government spending on public works, and the selling price of wheat. Such factors had profound affects on the South Australian economy being as dependent as it was on its agricultural produce not only for export revenue but also for general business confidence. By 1918 an unskilled factory worker in South Australia could earn on average �11 per month.
Wages for Australian seamen were also far higher than those paid on Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish ships. In the early 1920s Australian and British seamen could earn �4 per month. By the end of the decade typical monthly wages had increased to �5 per month, at the same time as Norwegian and Finnish mariners were earning �2 per month.
This was a time of increasing union militancy and the seamen's union secured a number of important victories in the Federal Arbitration Court. Therefore, Swedish seamen could potentially earn at least twice as much on Australian ships, and perhaps four times as much in certain land-based occupations. Most sources agree that these higher wages, on both land and sea, were a key factor in encouraging Swedish seamen, and other Scandinavians, to desert or be officially 'paid off' in Australian ports. Koivukangas, for example, noted evidence from the Finnish warden at the Sydney-based Mission to Seamen that Finnish rates of pay were well-below similar rates for Australian seamen. According to McCutchon, Port Adelaide had a long tradition of desertions beginning in the 1850s when seamen were lured by the gold rushes to take the overland journey from Adelaide to the Victorian gold fields. Moreover, the prospect of a long and difficult voyage home with low wages was not a welcoming one and masters commonly had trouble securing crew. In such conditions, crimping, or even taking on inexperienced men (known as 'voyage runners'), was quite common.
One story from a Danish sailor may give us some insight into the decision to desert, and the attraction of life on land. Detlef Behnsen, a Danish sailor who went to sea at the age of thirteen in 1902, worked on various German, Russian and Norwegian vessels for the next eight years. In his published memoirs he mentions the various methods employed by Captains to discourage desertions, including holding back a seamen's pay, and posting attractive rewards for their return. In February 1910 he found himself in the Western Australian port of Fremantle where, on hearing of the opportunities that Australia offered, he considered jumping ship together with a ship mate (a Swede named Arthur Bassell). After the Captain of the Norwegian-registered Barque Marita had kept the crew working for two weeks without the opportunity to go ashore, the two men made up their minds to desert. By frequenting local bars they managed to secure work in the country, reasoning that the best way to avoid detection was the get away from the port area. The Captain posted a �10 reward but their new country-based employer did not hand them over to authorities.
The attraction of Australia was clearly a motivation for Behensen's desertion, but conditions on board the ship also played a role, suggesting a combination of specific 'push' and 'pull' factors. Similarly difficult economic conditions at home encouraged some Swedes to search for work and opportunity in Australia. Albert Nord, for example, left Sweden when he was twelve in 1899 and worked his passage to Australia on a sailing ship. He returned to Sweden after two years, but extreme poverty forced him to look to the sea again in 1902 and he returned to Port Adelaide and this time stayed for the rest of his life. This general economic decline also had specific regional effects. In �land, for example, the ship building industry, went into rapid decline in the late nineteenth century, with many hundreds of men thrown out of work. Later in this period other economic downturns in Sweden may have encouraged seamen to search for work elsewhere and perhaps consider long-term residence in other countries. During 1921--22 the Swedish economy suffered widespread unemployment through the effects of post-war recession and deflation, with unemployment among trade unionists reaching more than 30%.
Conclusion
Seamen's migration can be effectively contextualised in terms of the labour market prospects for seamen, both in their country of origin and in their chosen destination for migration or temporary settlement. The movement between Australian and Sweden was facilitated by the shipping industry, the way the industry was organised and especially the poor conditions of employment and low wages. Higher wages in Australia together with the coincidental arrival of many Swedish and Scandinavian ships in summer, the time of the highest demand for labour in South Australia, encouraged many seamen to discharge or desert. Towards the end of this period, however, as Australia moved towards depression, the country's appeal weakened as unemployment climbed, and waterfront work, indeed industrial work more generally, becomes less labour intensive.
This research represents the first stage of what will be a more in depth analysis of seaman's migration to South Australia. Having established the broad economic and industry framework, the next issue that needs to be addressed is the individual experiences of seamen. This work will rely on Commonwealth Naturalisation records held at the Australian Archives in Canberra, but also the extensive network of family historians, whose methods and activities often represent unfamiliar territory for professional historians. However, in proceeding with this kind of research, we need to recognise that those seamen who came and left Australian shores--by choosing not to became citizens--but who nevertheless lived and worked in Australia for a time, are a difficult group to study, at least from an Australian base. Their short term stay in Australia often meant that their presence and influence was not accurately reflected in official records. It could be that this group needs to be studied from the Swedish end of the migration/temporary settlement path. One of the major challenges for researchers working in this area is the task of securing adequate access to primary and secondary sources in a climate of shrinking public funding for research and travel. This suggests that the best way forward in analysing world-wide paths of migration and movement is through cooperative research with other scholars based in the migrant group's country of origin.
Dr Erik Eklund is a lecturer at the University of Newcastle. He presented this paper to the Sydney Branch of the Australian Society for the Study of Labour History in May 1999.
by John Robertson
It seems that every columnist worth their picture byline has wanted a go; either bagging or backing his book "Labor without Class". The problem is, on my reading of the columns, very few of those who have attacked Thompson's book have bothered to actually read it.
All have latched onto the idea that Thompson wants to wind back the clock and push the Labor Party back to its blue-collar, working class base.
Thompson argues that the term "working class" is broader than blue collar and in fact includes many lower paid white collar workers in the service sector. This he supports with ABS data.
When he showed me a draft of his book, the one suggestion I made was to replace the term "working class" with "ordinary Australians".
Using this term, his arguments that the opinions of the elites have gained precedence in the ALP would still hold true; and some of the more hysterical class rhetoric may have been avoided.
A number of Thompson's ideas have merit. For instance, there is a case that some interest groups gained control of ALP agendas to the detriment of ordinary Australians which is supported in the book with quotes from labour history books and biographies including Hayden's
The non-means-testing of childcare and tertiary education is an area where there should be a sensible debate. If the same arguments were applied for access to public housing, there would be outrage. Thompson demonstrates on tertiary education that the number of people from low income families did not increase substantially as a result of the Witlam Government's introduction of free university education.
Labor must reconnect with the needs and aspirations of ordinary Australians; indeed much of the 1998 ALP federal election campaign was an attempt to recognise this fact. Any sensible analysis of the rise of One Nation would recognise that it was the failure of Labor to communicate its vision for Australia with ordinary Australians which contributed to the rise of a Party which appealed as much to Labor's traditional supporters as it did to conservative.
Thompson does not advocate a throwback to some good old days, quite the contrary, he endorses the economic changes implemented under Hawke and Keating and accepts the need for that to continue. He acknowledges this is essential if ordinary Australians are to achieve their aspirations. What he is more interested in is the way these policies are communicated and applied.
People have also attacked Thompson for lacking any original thought. Thompson never claimed the material itself was original, what he has done to demonstrate his thesis was to pull together data and other comments to support his view of Labor's failings.
So why all the fuss? Perhaps its because of the kernel of truth in Thompson's thesis jars the "elite". They were implicated in the conspiracy of silence that surrounded many of the debates of the late 1980s and early 1990s. As Thompson points out, while they were being accused of being racists and rednecks it was the working people of Australia who were living multiculturalism in their suburbs.
Framing these views in terms of ordinary Australians rather than working class may have made for a more rational debate of Labor Without Class. Then again, if Michael Thompson had listened to me, the first run of his book would probably not be close to sold out!
With union density at an all time low and still falling the Labor Council has commissioned a number of surveys of workers to establish workers views on the relevance and effectiveness of unions. Each survey has shown that workers generally believe unions are necessary and do perform an important role in maintaining wages and conditions and equalising the negotiation power between the employee and employer.
Many women and young people have indicated that they would be prepared to join unions except for fear of reprisal from their employers or they have not been approached to join. It is within this context that Michael Costa has led the debate on effective unionism and recruitment strategies.
The Trade Union Training Authority in NSW under the stewardship of Michael Crosby have worked co-operatively with Labor Council in developing seminars and training programmed focused on membership recruitment and more importantly retention of union members.
The Australian labor Party is also putting out suggestions that the party membership base should be expanded to capture small business and rural people. Questions are being asked about the appropriateness of unions still controlling 60% of ALP delegates at the Annual Conference when unions can no longer legitimately claim to represent the majority of workers.
It is within this context that the question must be asked "Is it time to review the trade union movement and their political wing the Australian Labor Party?"
The answer must be YES - as a movement representing workers and their families we must be willing to not only review our own relevance but we must be prepared to change to meet the expectations of our members. The question that has to be answered is "if we have a need to change?" The suggestion that factionalism is the core problem is too narrow. I know that Michael Costa and other see this as only part of the overall problem and on its own will not solve our problems however, after decades of factionalism (at times based on ideology) what can be introduced to replace our factional based structures.
The ideology positions are not as wide as they used to be - the dreaded communist threat is no longer relevant - union amalgamations have been achieved irrespective of different factional partners coming together. Yet factionalism has continued both within the unions movement and the ALP. Some say that our movement allows for a diverse and wide range of views - this is true however, it does not fully explain the factional divisions that are now seen to be holding us back.
Perhaps in the past decade we have seen factionalism evolve to tribalism. Unions and individuals who are concerned about the centralisation of power, the exclusion of their ideas and their ability to influence macro outcomes has resulted in them joining factions in the same way that workers join in collectiveness for protection and a greater say.
Any review of the trade union movement or the Labor Party must address the issue of central control. The ability of cross-factional support on major issues is well know. The Labor Council of NSW has recruited cross-factional people who have worked well for the common cause. Individual skills and talents have been brought together that ensure those polices and future directions for the Labor movement are progressed.
But it still remains to be seen if tribalism will not take over where factionalism finished. The challenge for Michael Costa and the affiliated unions is to ensure that decision making and individual ideas and beliefs can still be debated, discussed and acted on. I believe this can be achieved and though proper consultation and structures the Labor Council can leas NSW unions into the next millennium stronger and better equipped to recruit and service workers.
The more challenging debate will be the future structure of the ALP. Should there by any reduction in trade union influence? To answer this question another question needs to be asked - "how does the union movement hold back the ALP?" I am to be convinced that as the political wing of the trade union movement is the strength of the ALP. We are a party that is broad based. Workers, unemployed, rich, poor, small business, academics and rural people belong to the ALP. We are seen as a political party that has strong foundations and a committed membership base. We are not seen as an opportunist party that recruits candidates for office who have only been in the party for a few weeks before an election.
We have a party that each year bestows life membership to members who have 30 to 40 years service - something that the Coalition have difficulty doing. Should the ALP restructure? If so, how?
I would argue that a review of our structures is warranted. I would argue that our various policy committees are too restrictive and those party members who have the intellect an knowledge would have difficulty in being elected onto policy committees. There would be scope to review policy committee members so that annual conference elects policy committee members and the Minister (or Shadow Minister) may nominate some policy committee members based on their ability to bring expertise to policy committee deliberations.
The party should also consider policy committees seeking wider community input before policies are formulated, eg: public forums, community groups. The strength of our party is our commitment to social justice, a fair go and caring for those in the community who are less fortunate that us. IF we move away form these issues - if we isolate these voters and embrace the free market deregulated philosophies of business then our party will truly be indistinguishable form the Conservatives.
That is not to say that we can abandon economic responsibilities or alienate large and small business, or follow a path of social reform that will never be achieved because NSW is not seen as employment friendly.
History has shown that only a Labor Government has been able to introduce social justice, major state infrastructure and economic polices that ensures we have the lowest unemployment levels of any State and both small and large business want to establish in NSW. I don't believe there is nay need to be apologetic or concerned about the trade union influence on and in the ALP. It is time to be more pro-active in policy development with the ability for consultation across the community.
Nick Lewocki is State Secretary of the Rail Tram and Bus Union
Her father spent most of his footy life in an era when goodwill, gate receipts, and chook raffles were enough to sustain a top level football club. The VFL, as it was then, was mostly a parochial suburban Melbourne affair. One of the strengths of Rules in Victoria and the Southern half of the continent was that it was, effectively, the only winter game in town and there fore bridged the religious and socio-economic divides. Today it is no longer the only game in town and other codes, indeed other sports, are looking for their slice of the action.
These days the game has changed and so have the finances required to run it. Corporate sponsorship and professional administration are major ingredients in the make up of football codes. The players, of course, are important but wouldn't be there without the other components of a top level club. Or certainly not as comparatively well paid professionals anyway.
So where is football going in this country? I have dusted off my crystal ball and gazed into it. Those that predict the eventual demise of Aussie Rules often point out that there is no international representation for the code. The hybrid version of Gaelic Football is discounted. Yet in spite this crowd attendances continue to grow and its expansion as a national sport continues to succeed. AFL club memberships continue to grow, while at the other end of the scale junior participation rates, especially in the non-traditional states, increase exponentially.
The Swans success is seen as, at best, ephemeral. It's Sydney's love affair with winners they say. The Northern Kangaroos had fifteen thousand at their last game. Free tickets could only be responsible for that. Yes, there were freebies and I had one. But they still got a crowd on a cold long weekend Monday - not a traditional day out for Sydney sports fans. Other codes have not been slow to hand out tickets to get bums on seats.
So, what of our rivals? Rugby League has survived its corporate wars and the reunified competition is attracting more fans to the games. How much of this is due to the supporters of the endangered species such as South Sydney and Balmain turning up to save their clubs remains to be seen. However, it's the off field antics that continue to plague the code. Drunken exploits and scissors wielding officials have grabbed the headlines all too often. I'm not writing off League but it has a long way to go to recover the ground lost due to the Super League fiasco.
Rugby Union should have been the biggest beneficiary of the Super League affair. Its popularity has gone up with the advent of such things as the introduction of the Super 12's. The newfound honesty in allowing players to be openly professional has removed one of the major slurs on the game. However, in the short term at least, it's the professionalism that may be its biggest problem. The rate of representative football means that the clubs - the grass roots of the game - effectively never see the now elite players. In my opinion, at some stage there won't be enough top quality players to fill the gaps caused by injuries and retirements unless something is done to remedy this.
Soccer. Round ball. Real football, the purists say. A shotgun is not a rifle but both are firearms. The game has the highest participation rate of any code in the country. However, they don't hold the majority of players past seventeen years of age.
Money is the big problem for local soccer. Mostly overseas money. The recent payment of a $75 million transfer fee highlights this. Australia continues to be a nursery for the big leagues and consequently the local game suffers. Even though some sides have a relatively big following and attendances many struggle both in player depth and finances. Many fans refuse to watch the local game on TV let alone go to the grounds.
It's probably an unanswerable question but how much did it cost Australian soccer when they failed to make last years World Cup? Plenty, would be the simple answer but to quantify the loss would be impossible. And subsequent dithering by Soccer Australia over appointing a new coach hasn't helped.
It's an interesting paradox that the strength of overseas soccer is a problem for the local game, the strength of the Australian League could be a long term headache for that code. The highest level competition League is, arguably, the battle between the Cane Toads and the Cockroaches - also known as the State of Origin not, as you might expect, any of the international contests. This could diminish the popularity of that game elsewhere as player look to codes where they have a chance of international success.
There is, clearly, room for all these codes in Australia but the big question is how the market share is divided between them. It is the international nature of three of the codes that is seen as their strength. However that could be also be something of a collective Achilles' Heel. It may be that the comparatively insular nature of Australian Football could well be its saviour. It allows the administrators to enforce such things as salary caps and player lists and thereby keep the spiralling cost under some sort of control
.
As the dust settles on my crystal ball I see the game surviving well beyond my lifetime.
The Federal Government is proposing more industrial law changes following the introduction of the Workplace Relations Act in 1996. If implemented these willdisadvantage women workers.
Nobbling the Industrial Relations Commission
The Government wants to further limit the role of the Commission which has been fundamental to protecting the wages and conditions of Australian women.
Women have achieved working conditions through the Commission that are better than many enjoyed by women overseas. These include close to equal pay in award rates of pay, maternity and family leave entitlements and more recently equal remuneration for work of equal value.
The Government has already limited the Commission's powers to arbitrate to certain 'allowable matters'. It now wants to limit its powers to conciliate to those same matters.
This means the Commission could not be called upon to assist workers and their employers negotiate over conditions such as equal opportunity and sexual harassment.
The proposals also introduce a new user pay system of private mediation which would operate in competition with the Commission. Employers will be encouraged to bypass the Commission as a forum for resolving disputes.
The Government is also seeking to introduce limited seven year terms for Commission members. This has been rightly seen by former Commission members as a direct threat to the independence and integrity of the Commission.
It is critical to the Commission's authority that it is able to stand up and reject Government submissions in the many cases in which the Government intervenes but most importantly in national wage cases.
The Commission's discretionary powers over a whole range of issues, but in particular with respect to industrial action, would also be removed under the new proposals. This means the Commission's power to suggest common sense and practical resolutions to disputes will be curtailed.
These changes, if implemented, would undermine one of the great strengths of the Commission: its unrivalled authority as an independent, expert forum in which employers and workers can have confidence that it will deal fairly and effectively with all matters affecting workplace relations.
They will undermine the capacity of the Commission to deal effectively with wages and conditions of those workers who are dependent on the Commission rather than their own bargaining power, to win such improvements.
Awards - Withering on the Vine
Women are disproportionately dependent on awards for their wages and conditions. The ACTU estimates that fifty percent of women working part-time are dependent on awards - some 800,000 workers. We estimate that 20% of full-time women workers are similarly dependant - an additional 420,000 workers. This makes a total of 1,220,000 women dependent on awards.
The specific 'allowable matters' for awards relate largely to pay and leave issues. The Commission has also been able to make decisions regarding 'incidental matters' in respect to these issues. The new proposals seek to remove this power.
The Government is also seeking to remove long service leave, leave for jury service, superannuation, trade union training leave and union picnic days from awards.
It wants to require awards be stripped back to the minimum conditions before safety net rises can be paid to workers dependent on them. It also wants to make it harder to move from State awards to Federal Awards.
The overall impact of the changes would be to reduce the role of awards to the barest minimum conditions and force workers to rely upon enterprise bargaining or individual contracts for pay rises.
It is critical for women that awards continue to be relevant and as comprehensive as possible.
If awards clearly become a second rate, bare minimum system this will have a disastrous effect on women's wages compared to men's and on the conditions that women are required to work under compared to men's.
Leaving Market Forces To Prevail - Bargaining
The clear purpose of the changes proposed is to make bargaining the primary means of regulation of wages and working conditions.
The Government is seeking to entrench individual contracts as the pre-eminent form of employment relationship.
Women workers do not do as well in bargaining as men. This is because they work in industries that are not as industrially strong or as economically strategic.
Formal bargaining is strongest in the manufacturing, transport, communications and construction industries. It is weakest in the retail, hospitality and personal services industries.
ACIRRT research in NSW shows that only 4% of NSW women workers in workplaces with more than 20 employees have their pay and conditions regulated by NSW and Federal agreements.
ACIRRT research suggests that where women receive above award rates of pay it is at the employer's instigation. 23% of NSW women workers receive overawards unrelated to formal agreements.
While only a relatively small number of individual contracts (AWAs) have been made Australian-wide it is of some concern that a quarter of these involve intermediate clerical and sales and services workers. The Government now proposes to:
Allow AWAs to be implemented as soon as they are signed, rather than from the date of approval by the Employment Advocate (EA).
Remove the requirement that the employer must offer the same AWA to all comparable employees, thus allowing a discriminatory approach to offering agreements.
Remove the requirement that the EA refer an AWA to the Commission when unsure about whether or not it disadvantages employees.
Allow AWAs providing for total remuneration of more than $68,000 to be approved without any checking by the EA.
Allow AWAs to be made undercutting a collective certified agreement, even while the latter is in operation.
With respect to certified agreements the Government proposes the following:
Allow certified agreements to be approved in secret; that is without a formal hearing by the Commission.
Allow agreements to be made with any group of employees, rather than being required to cover all or a separate part of the enterprise. This will allow the employer to discriminate against particular workers, including women.
Other Changes
There are a range of other changes that will also impact detrimentally on women workers, including new provisions making legal industrial action effectively make it impossible. It is also proposed to limit the ability of unions to enter workplaces and represent their members by requiring members to personally invite them in on each occasion.
Further limitations on protections against unfair dismissal are proposed as is the permanent entrenchment of youth wages and making it easier for employers to disguise 'employees' as 'independent contractors'.
Conclusion
Australian women workers need a strong, independent and fearless Industrial Relations Commission. This is the body that has delivered for Australian women. We must protect and preserve its important role in our system of industrial relations. We must ensure it has the powers it needs to protect ordinary workers who rely upon it for their wages and conditions.
Australian women workers need a comprehensive and relevant award system. We need a fair and transparent and accountable system of bargaining on top of that award system.
It gets worse; Piers is set to take two weeks holiday leaving us wondering how we will satisfy our readers constant demand for a weekly analysis of his Pier-dantry.
No matter. Workers Online regards each setback as an opportunity and see Piers break as a chance for further self-promotion.
The following letter was fired off to Piers' boss, Col Allan, this morning
...
Dear Mr Allan,
I was fortunate this week to receive a call from your columnist Piers Akerman. I do not intend to reveal the content of this private conversation, as Mr Akerman is prone to do. However, he did inform me that he was about to take two weeks leave.
We at Labor Council are concerned that his absence will leave a gaping whole in your newspaper's coverage, depriving your readers of important insights into the conduct of public affairs.
Accordingly, we are prepared to offer the resources of the union movement to help fill this gap. As you would be aware that we employ a former Daily Telegraph journalist, Peter Lewis, who is experienced in your paper's unique style of journalism.
While Peter is currently editor of our online newspaper, Workers Online (which incidentially, you continually fail to mention when attacking me and the labour movement), we would be prepared to offer you his services, at no cost to you, to fill Piers' column.
Peter can offer the following columns at short notice:
- It Works! How Meditation Changed Piers' Political Views
- Shock! Native Title is Fair
- Revealed! Homosexuals Are Human Beings
- Outrage! Unions Actually Care for Their Members
This is a serious offer. Your newspaper is losing credibility with working people for its bias against unions. Giving us a fair run for this period would help restore some credibility.
In addition, you would be aware that Workers Online has offered a reward for information leading to criminal charged being laid against Mr Akerman. Not that they expect to receive any.
Workers Online has informed me that it will suspend its offer for the duration of Mr Akerman's holidays. It is our strong belief that all workers are entitled to enjoy the benefits of paid leave, which trade unions have secured and continue to fight for, in a private and relaxed manner.
Yours Sincerely
MICHAEL COSTA
Secretary
We are waiting by the phone ....
© 1999-2000 Labor Council of NSW LaborNET is a resource for the labour movement provided by the Labor Council of NSW URL: http://workers.labor.net.au/19/print_index.htmlLast Modified: 15 Nov 2005 [ Privacy Statement | Disclaimer | Credits ] LaborNET is proudly created, designed and programmed by Social Change Online for the Labor Council of NSW |