*****
The madness of King George the III was legendary, but even that pales into comparison when we revisit the history of a man who is yet to be elected to the position he has held for the last four-years.
The fact that George Bush is even a candidate is bizarre enough, but the prospect that he may win is truly terrifying.
The man who has brought to life Orwell's vision that War Is Peace, Ignorance is Strength and Freedom is Slavery - minus the irony - comes up for a performance review this week.
Because of the peculiarities of the US version of democracy, which is rule by minority, this idiot savant of the New World Order actually has a chance of continuing to lead the West further down the path to oblivion.
He may look like a monkey, but George W Bush isn't going to admit he is one, or even that he has ever made mistakes.
As we have learnt in Australia, being conservative means never having to say you're sorry.
As the rather erudite Doonesbury comic strip points out, the only mistake he has been prepared to admit is in appointing a few aides who made the mistake of pointing out his mistakes.
Still, our Tool Of The Week has generated an astonishing amount of satire - mainly because he opens us up to whole new realm of the possibilities available to the Empo... , umm, sorry, President of the United States.
Time was when a cigar could make headlines, but George W has left that line far behind. Now with George W anything is possible. Who knows if an invasion of Canada may or may not happen?
Certainly with George the Lesser at the helm it cannot be ruled out.
This is the man who would have us believe that things on the ground in Iraq are "better than they appear", which must be an astonishing revelation to those who are on the ground, and even more astonishing to those who are now under it.
With Election Day set down for Melbourne Cup day our Tool Of The Week is leaving nothing to chance.
Over a thousand lawyers will be on standby on election day across the world's strangest democracy to make sure that these sort of freedoms don't get out of hand and end up enfranchising the poor, the destitute or any tired huddled masses yearning for freedom that might want to exercise the vote.
Bush has hired these lawyers to challenge people's right to vote, while running a war on the other side of the world so that people allegedly can vote.
It's the sort of subtle logic that has made America so beloved around the globe.
Bush has spent over $80 million dollars on one state alone, which is also astonishing given that Metro Goldwyn Meyer only spent $8 million on the entire production of Oklahoma.
What will really be an inspiration to hard-bitten working people across the globe is the $1,036,000,000.00 being spent on this election campaign.
While it's been said that freedom comes at a high price, our Tool Of the Week shows us that autocracy comes at an even higher one.
"We will fight for the wages and conditions of our members," Cameron pledged in a Melbourne speech to the Industrial Relations Society.
"We will fight to ensure that our members have respect from their employers. We will fight on behalf of working people and we will fight on behalf of democracy in Australia.
"Our members and our union know that fighting back makes a difference."
Cameron took the argument up to Howard and his supporters in a clear statement that further moves against workers' rights will be resisted.
He argued that the philosophy behind the Federal Government's legislative plan - that trade unions were third parties interfering in workplaces - was a "myth" aimed at denying workers their right to freedom of association.
"It is based on the false premise that the interests and aspirations of employers and employees are as one and differences are non-existent," Cameron said.
"Proposals by John Howard to further constrain trade union activity are a fundamental attack on the democratic rights of working people in this country."
Cameron, also a member of the ACTU's national executive, used the Electrolux ruling to argue that federal government and High Court were colluding in the destruction of Australian democracy.
He contrasted their approach with that of Canadian judges who recently held the right to not associate was "antithetical" to its duty to protect the right to associate.
That Court unanimously concluded freedom of association was mean to protect the collective pursuit of common goals.
Cameron also had a shot at political Labor leaders for their failure to confront the Coalition's IR agenda.
"Unlike Bob Carr and Mark Latham, I do not believe the Howard Government has any political mandate to destroy core labour standards in this country," Cameron said.
"It is about time that Labor politicians stood up for working families and their unions. History will judge the silence of Labor in this debate as on of the great betrayals of democracy in Australia's history."
Cameron said the planned legislative assault on workers' rights was a reaction against the success unions had had in challenging the right of business to dominate, control and "in some cases destroy" the lives of workers.
Workplace Relations Minister Kevin Andrews this week flagged that at least three IR bills, including legalising unfair sackings, would be reintroduced to the House before Christmas.
NSW Labor Council secretary, John Robertson, predicted that would be the outcome of Latham�s decision to join IR to Industry and Infrastructure in a super ministry under the control of shadow cabinet dry, Stephen Smith.
Latham has split traditional IR responsibilities amongst Smith and shadow cabinet rookies, Tanya Plibersek who will take on work, family and community; and Penny Wong who picks up employment and workforce participation.
Robertson predicts when the Left women, who have both supported workers in the past, try to stick up for traditional labour values they will be "squeezed' by Latham's desire to cosy up to big business.
"It is going to be played out factionally when it shouldn't be," Robertson warned. "The women will be portrayed as the loony left so the industry element of the portfolio can hold sway.
"Unions can't afford to be divided by factional warlords. We have to develop a united trade union position based on core labour principles and take it to the party.
"It is quite disturbing and, frankly, alarming that IR and the union movement are being used by the federal leader to justify his defeat.
"The fact is that IR flew under the radar during the election campaign but Mark Latham is falling for the same trick as Simon Crean by allowing the Liberal Party to set his agenda.
"If he doesn't improve his position he will go the same way as his predecesor.
"The Labor Party will never succeed as a pale imitation of the conservatives. It is a Labor Party founded by trade unionists to look after the interests of working men and women and their families.
"It's our party and that's something the federal leader needs to understand."
Robertson was strongly supported by TWU secretary, Tony Sheldon, who also called on unionists to ditch factional alliances in favour of a united position.
Sheldon predicted Latham's first test would come when the Coalition tried to strip collective protections from contractors. He pointed out that one third of TWU members were owner operators and that both the ETU and CFMEU had made recent breakthroughs on behalf of contactor members.
Robertson and Sheldon, both members of the NSW Right, echoed sentiments expressed by national Left union leader, Doug Cameron.
Cameron called Latham's promise to consult business over a rewrite of its industrial relations policy a "cowardly scapegoating exercise".
The AMWU national secretary wrote to Latham expressing concern about his plan to begin talks with business about policy changes.
"That the party has identified industrial relations as a key weakness, and a reason it lost the election, is, to say the very least, astounding," Cameron wrote.
He invited to set up a meeting for Latham, Smith and shadow treasurer Wayne Swan with workers whose employers had tried to block their access to union representation.
In the unprecedented action, contractors and workers joined forces to wring improvements out of four companies benefiting from the state�s home building boom.
Monier, Bristile, Prime and anti-union activist Len Buckeridge's Harmony Group had operated a restrictive system in the traditionally un-unionised sector by selling tiles and labour as a bundled product.
Tiling contractors said they would eventually need 50 percent increases to bring their workers onto parity with eastern states counterparts.
During their stoppage, the CFMEU received public support from unexpected quarters. Local broadcaster and former West Australian editor, Paul Murray, said the WA tiling industry had "all the hallmarks of a modern day sweatshop".
CFMEU state secretary, Kevin Reynolds, said the four companies had suppressed rates to the point that, in the midst of a housing boom, contractors couldn't afford to pay award minimums.
"Even though the award pay for a first year junior is just $6 an hour, most didn't even get that," Reynolds said. "Other kids got more working at McDonalds and KFC.
"The only future for young tilers in this state was to be robbed blind and then thrown on the scrap heap when they burned out at an early age."
Back in 1992, WA IRC chief commissioner Bill Coleman, reported that few tilers remained in the industry until their 50s.
"Their fate appears to be either to obtain a position as a supervisor or be forced out on the invalid pension," Coleman reported.
A recent Housing Industry Association report found that the average pay of WA tradesmen had risen 12.5 percent in the past year, except in the roofing industry where rates had moved 1.5 percent.
When the CFMEU launched its campaign, the tiling cartel threatened ACCC action against contractors who supported increased rates for their employees on the grounds that it was a breach of the Trades Practices Act.
About 800 tilers were involved in the strike. They returned to work this week after the companies agreed to fund 15 percent increases, over three years; and increase casual loadings, redundancy, sick leave and annual leave entitlements.
Tilers also won site and height allowance payments.
AIRC senior vice president, Iain Ross, green-lighted controls on contract labour, prohibitions on AWAs and union entry rights contained in an NUW agreement covering employees at LK Ballantyne�s Laverton site.
The decision de-bunked the insistence of some industrial law firms that they could roll dozens of negotiated agreement because key clauses failed to "pertain" to the strict interpretation of the employer-employee relationship contained in the Workplace Relations Act.
Vice president Ross rejected the employers' contention that anything designed to strengthen the positions of unions, or their members, was illegal.
"The submissions of the Ai Group and ACCI almost seem to proceed on the assumption that clauses which give unions, or their representatives, rights are, almost be definition, not clauses which pertain to the employment relationship and hence cannot be included in a certified agreement.
"This is a false premise. The task to be undertaken is one of characterisation," Ross said.
Ross did, however, roll a clause providing for union fee deductions, along with another allowing union delegates access to new workers to discuss union matters.
Ross said certified agreements could contain clauses that were "machinery in nature, ancillary or incidental" to a matter that pertained to the employer-employee relationship.
He okayed the following clauses which employers had sought to have ruled illegal:
- an agreement to commence negotiations three months before the current deal expires
- indemnities for employees against damages claims
- casual employees, including those employed by a third party, to receive no less than terms contained in the agreement
- substitution of public holidays
- trade union training leave
- a commitment not to introduce AWAs during the life of the agreement
- union notice board obligation on employer
- paid time off for union delegates
- time off for paid union meetings
- right of entry
- requirement on employer to keep time and wages records
NUW Victorian secretary, Martin Pakula, called the decision a "fantastic result" that meant, with some "minor changes", unions could could negotiate as normal.
Attention will now turn to Perth where Westfarmers Coal is seeking unspecified damages from the AMWU, WA state officials and four Collie delegates on the grounds that "protected" action was, in fact, "unprotected" because, under Electrolux principles, some claims did not pertain to the employer-employee relationship.
This case takes the Electrolux argument one step further, testing the ability of employers to financially cripple unions if claims are subsequently found not to pertain.
Westfarmers, represented by Clayton Utz, has taken exception to half a dozen claims, including right of entry, controls on contracting, delegate education and local government representation leave.
Its arguments will go before Justice French, in the Federal Court, this week.
Nick Lewocki, from the Rail Tram and Bus Union told a safety delegates conference how RailCorp have chosen to test drivers on shape recognition, picking the odd one out and letter recognition.
Experts called in to examine the RailCorp tests asked why a train driver simulation wasn't being used to test drivers.
Lewocki says that the tests RailCorp are using, known as psychometric tests, are not designed to test driver safety, but to give RailCorp management an excuse not to invest in safety infrastructure, such as an adequate communications system and proper training.
One test inflicted on drivers involves a computer game style test using what looks like an oversize Game Boy to "test" your brain.
"This would be great if we were getting Donkey Kong to drive our trains, but luckily we deal with real people." Lewocki told the conference. "We have had members who have, out of their own pocket, had themselves re-tested, only to find that RailCorp's tests were way off the mark."
One of the tests, the Mackworth Clock test, was used to test spitfire pilots in WWII.
Psychometric testing will come under the microscope at the conference, which will also hear how miners were Psychometrically tested for their ability to operate heavy machinery by using straws and cellotape to stop an egg from breaking.
The conference also heard from experts on emerging issues such as fatigue management and bullying, as well as receiving valuable information on return to work provisions under WorkCover.
"At the heart of that system is a consultative process," says NSW Labor Council secretary John Robertson. "Unfortunately not all employers are rising to the challenge."
"We are seeing examples in workplaces where safety is being used as a justification for management to wield the big stick with employees simply to reinforce management authority.
Robertson called on employers to take a holistic approach to managing the risks that their employees face.
"Fatigue is a killer; we know that from our road statistics," says Robertson. "The decision last Thursday by Justice Walton acknowledges that this is true of the workplace as well.
"Fatigue is a serious and emerging workplace safety issue that needs to be adequately addressed.
"This is an issue about impairment and employers that seem to be eager to implement drug and alcohol testing must also show the same sort of eagerness to address the underlying issue behind drug and alcohol testing, which is impairment if they are fair-dinkum about safety."
"The message has been sent loud and clear to employers - they must address risks before workers are hurt or tragically killed."
The animals, used to collect rubbish in the narrow lanes of Lucknow, have been paid the same grass and fodder allowance for many years despite inflation.
The donkeys' rise will take them from 300 Rupees ($15.00) to 400 Rupees a month, effective from the Diwali fesitval on November 14.
Many companies use the festival to give bonuses to employees. The Hindu goddess of money is worshipped on the day.
While no Indian asses were available for comment, Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon was braying about fee hikes for his board members.
Qantas Declares At "Six For Sixty-Six"
The move has prompted Qantas techs to adopt a "six for sixty six" approach to EBA negotiations.
The maintenance workers want six percent, pointing to the 66 percent pay rise directors voted themselves and the record $660 million company profit - up 90 percent.
ALAEA federal secretary David Kemp believes the enormous expertise of tech staff is impossible to replace, as opposed to directors voted themselves an extra "cool million" a head.
"Tech staff do the invaluable work of aircraft maintenance logistics, and integration," says Kemp "as well as saving millions in expert cost analysis, planning and scheduling."
They deserve the full six percent boost and no less."
Development Application costs on the 28,000 dwellings built annually will rise by over a thousand dollars each following the decision to outsource building approvals.
Sydney Water system designs for new homescost of $800 but, by next April, water service co-ordinators who charge around $2000 per approval, will run the process.
Sydney Water will sack 27 staff in the move.
The Australian Services Union says the cuts are another example of the Carr Government passing costs onto consumers by slashing services and shedding staff.
"Making families already struggling with Sydney's House prices pay more for their homes is just ridiculous," says ASU secretary Kristyn Thompson, "it has to be stopped."
"Everytime they cut something the public ends up paying more."
Water Servicing Co-orrdinators have been running in parallel with Sydney Water for some time.
Soon after they were introduced Sydney Water raised it's own pricing from $360 to $800.
The ASU believes this was an attempt to make the privateers more appealing so in-house services could be slashed.
Thompson believes outsourcing will also lead to mains problems.
"Sydney Water has better standards and the over arching interest of the community at heart," she said. "After all it owns the infrastructure and so takes good care of it."
"Sydney Water's licences mean it also has to take great care of the environment."
FSU assistant national secretary, Sharron Caddie, will move an AGM resolution calling for future restructures to go before shareholders in a bid to stop slash and burn policies that have cost 20,000 jobs and shut more than 600 branches.
Workers are annoyed at last year's "Which new bank?" re-structure which proposed axing another 3700 jobs, while claiming to promote excellent service and staff morale.
Staff endorsed shareholder activism during a national strike in July over staffing levels, relief structures, work targets and pay rates.
The David Murray-led bank responded by unilaterally increasing wage rates by four percent and refusing to negotiate on any claims put forward by staff.
Caddie says the bank has treated employees and EBA negotiations with contempt.
"During negotiations management thanked us for our presentations and said no to every single aspect of our claim," Caddie said. "Federal IR rules don't require good faith bargaining so the Commonwealth doesn't negotiate in good faith.
"Eighty seven percent of employees believe lack of staff is the most important issue confronting them."
"David Murray has lied to the extent he said he would listen and he's failed to provide them with the very things they have said are fundamental to providing good service and having a good day at work."
Mario Tuccia, a 33-year veteran at One Steel Kembla Grange, received a safety achievement award from the NSW Labor Council for his initiative at last week's UnionSafe safety delegates conference.
Tuccia designed and built the WorkCover accredited 'flying saw lifting jig' for cutting pipe, which has virtually eliminated back injuries in a previously notorious section of the One Steel plant.
"The safety problem occurred when two employees had to physically lift the saw blade and place it on a motor in a confined space," says Tuccia. "There are no longer any back injuries occurring from the saw blade process."
Tuccia says that there were two or three injuries a year in the past, something that would have cost One steel tens of thousands of dollars a year.
While Tuccia sees the $200 bonus as recognition of his efforts, he is also concerned that the paltry amount is not a just recognition by management of the good ideas that come from the shop floor.
Tuccia has been an active union delegate and OHS Committee member, being Chairperson of the OHS committee at One Steel for the last 18 years.
Mario received his Award at the Third annual Unionsafe safety delegates conference held at Parramatta's Riverside Theatre.
Over 60 union workplace safety delegates were presented with awards by recently elected MP Peter Garrett, including Jo Reid, a Meatworker's Union member from Inghams' Chickens Cardiff plant.
Reid has battled hard in the face of company intransigence to ensure that safety issues are addressed in the often dangerous conditions found at the plant.
The conference also awarded the Brian Miller Lifetime achievement award to Barry Robson from the Maritime Union of Australia.
The Frank Belan Award, going to a member of the community who has worked to advocate for workers safety, saw the crowd giving a long ovation to Bernie Banton for his campaign against James Hardie's move to dodge it's responsibilities to asbestos victims.
"Some of these achievements are absolutely fantastic," says NSW Labor Council secretary John Robertson of the award winners. "I think that the contributions from our hard working safety delegates are in many instances a victory for common sense."
"We know that often being a safety representative is a tiring and thankless task with delegates often doing work outside of hours and even facing victimisation at work."
Darren Moon was killed when he was pulled into the rollers of a paper-making machine at Amcor's Melbourne plant last year.
The court heard the machine had been operating without safety guards since 1966.
"It's a joke, They have swept my son's ashes under the carpet," says Paul Moon, father of the victim. "He was dragged headfirst into a massive machine that should have been guarded."
"He was doing his job as he was trained and they get a quarter of the fine, which amounts to about one per cent of what they pay their top executives over the year."
The decision has sparked outrage amongst Victorian trade unionists, with the Victorian trades Hall Council's Leigh Hubbard asking "what is a life worth?"
"This company pleaded guilty to breaches of the OHS Act and admitted to not guarding a pulp paper machine," says Hubbard. "By pleading guilty Amcor have acknowledged that they have not been complying with Victoria's health and safety laws."
Hubbard added that due to a number of other incidents the company deserved a far more severe penalty."
Work Death Law Welcomed
Meanwhile, in NSW the Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union has welcomed the announcement by NSW Minister for Commerce, John Della Bosca, of the introduction of a new offence with jail penalties of up to five years for bosses who kill workers.
"These amendments are long overdue, and it has taken a constant flow of tragic deaths on workplaces, including the death of 28 year old father of two Glen Viegas on Sunday at Westfield Tuggerah, to finally force the Government's hand," says CFMEU NSW Secretary Andrew Ferguson.
"One worker still dies in NSW every two days, and this is an unacceptable number that we hope will drop because of this legislative change."
"But these laws are not good enough alone, the community also wants justice, and they want to see these laws enforced so that bosses no longer escape with a tap on the wrist for their negligent actions, but that they a punished fully for their actions."
The NSW Labor Council also welcomed the announcement by Industrial Relations Minister Della Bosca that the state government is moving towards tougher sanctions on workplace fatalities.
Union Wins In NZ
In other news a CFMEU backed Rugby League team won the New Zealand Maori Tournament - the first time a team from outside of New Zealand has won.
The team won all five games, including the Final 34-16.
"It was a great experience, says coach and former Penrith star Luke Goodwin. "Apart from my kids being born & my wedding day it would easily be the greatest moment and feeling I have ever felt!"
The Government says new laws, announced last week, will wind back the clock on James Hardie's 2001 corporate restructure and transfer ownership of two asbestos-producting subsidiaries back to the James Hardie group.
NSW Premier, Bob Carr, said he had been assured by legal experts the legislation would be legally enforcable.
But the head of the government's special commission of inquiry in the Hardie scandal, David Jackson, QC, said such legislation would be the subject of constitutional challenges in Australia.
Jackson also cast doubt on the laws enforcibility in the US or the Netherlands, where James Hardie has relocated it's business.
James Hardie signalled during the inquiry its intention to fight any retrospecitve legislation targeting there 2001 move offshore.
The laws are expected to increase pressure on James Hardie during ongoing negotiations with the unions to stump up the cash shortfall voluntarily.
Boycott and Picket the Safari Restaurant
SUPPORT UNPAID SUBCONTRACT BUILDING COMPANIES IN THEIR CAMPAIGN FOR JUSTICE how can you help? Boycott the Safari Restaurant, Sign our Supporters Petition, Make a donation to the campaign and Picket nightly from 6.15pm - 28 King Street, Newtown.
ACTU And Labor Council of NSW Drug, Alcohol and Fatigue Seminar
The ACTU and the NSW Labor Council will be hosting a Drug, Alcohol and Fatigue Seminar at the Sydney Masonic Centre on Wednesday 10 November 2004.
Increasingly employers are insisting that employees and potential employees submit to various forms of testing to ensure they are drug free.
Employees and their unions have opposed many forms of testing as they are intrusive, open to abuse and all too often used to create fear and culture change in the workplace. A number of major employers are currently attempting to force through policies and government and industry safety regulators are attempting to impose standards.
Unions do agree that drugs, alcohol and fatigue don't mix with work and that an impaired worker is a danger to themselves, their fellow workers and others. Unions also seek a holistic response that deals with all causes of impairment, including fatigue and one that recognises the privacy and other rights of employees. There has been a variety of positions put by different unions and union bodies.
The ACTU in association with the State and Territory Labour Councils believes it is time to develop a single view on this important issue. To this end a Drug, Alcohol and Fatigue Seminar will be held at Sydney's Masonic Centre on Wednesday 10 November 2004.
The seminar will have a practical focus and it is hoped it will produce a draft policy on the issue for consideration by the union movement as a whole. Numbers are strictly limited and a $50 fee will apply to cover overheads. Book early to avoid disappointment.
On payment of $50 (GST Inclusive) each participant will receive a booking confirmation by email and details for web access to conference materials.
Forward cheques to ACTU level 2, 393 Swanston Street Melbourne VIC 3000.
Email registration to [email protected]. Participants will receive written material, including an updated program in advance of the seminar in electronic form.
The price quoted is inclusive of GST. Upon acceptance of this registration the form becomes a Tax Invoice. ABN 81 849 815 200
Cancellations: You may make substitutions at any time; please notify us as soon as possible. Cancellations must be in writing. Registered delegates who do not attend or who cancel less than two weeks prior to the conference are liable for the entire fee.
Barnesy Does It For East Timorese Kiddies
Thursday November 11th, 6.30pm-11pm, Carlton & United Brewery bar and
function centre, Broadway, (opp.UTS) Australian Jesuit's Foundation "East
Timor Kids Benefit Nite" to send color-in books and pencils to Timor. Entry
$65 .00 (limit 300 people) includes food, drinks, stalls, auction, music.
Performers include Jimmy Barnes. Details
Women in International Security Department of Defence Briefing
Monday 22nd November, 5.30-6.30pm including question time, Department of
Foreign Affairs and Trade, NSW Office Level 10 Angel Place 123 Pitt Street,
Sydney, 'Women in International Security (Australia)' invite you to a
Department of Defence Briefing Two senior women within the Australian
Department of Defence will share their experiences from recent assignments
in East Timor and Iraq. Speakers: Jacinta Carroll - Director Europe,
Middle East and Rest of the World Major Powers and Global Interests Branch,
International Policy Division Sari Sutton - Acting Director,
South-West Pacific, International Policy Division Guests arrive - 5.15pm.
WIISA event - RSVP -
NEWS: UNIFEM Australia is currently coordinating the Spring Walk
campaign. Funds raised by will go to UNIFEM's work with Women's Peace and
Security in the Pacific. For further info contact Brooke at
politics In The Pub
Friday Nov 26th 6-8pm, Politics in the Pub, Gaelic Club, Surry Hills,
"Aceh & West Papua" with Dr Nurdin Rahman and John Martinkus.
150th Anniversary of Eureka Rebellion 2004
The VTHC is organising celebrations. They are as follows:
Saturday 27th November: State Government major event in Federation Square:
Afternoon Family Day
Monday 29th November: Union Commemoration Event Flag raising - Federation Square or Lygon Street at 2.00pm. Simultaneous flag raising at Bakery Hill Ballarat and Latrobe Valley. Win TV to broadcast. VTHC Choir
Thursday 2nd December: 6.00pm: Unions have a presence in Eureka Compound
7.30pm VTHC, NSW & QLD Trade Union Choirs 8.30pm 'A Night Under the Southern Cross'. Story Telling and songs with Richard Franklin, Shayne Howard, Dennis Court
Friday 3rd December (Eureka Day): Dawn Ceremony at Eureka Compound
(Community and unions), followed by Community Breakfast. 9.00am Union Train from Melbourne. 10.30am Ballarat Building Unions Picnic. 8.00pm Danny Spooner
- History of Eureka at Ballarat Trades Hall.
Saturday 4th December: 2.00pm Eureka Diggers March. It is proposed that a bus will leave Carlton at aprox 10.00am, and leaving Ballarat at 4.00pm.
Sunday 5th December: 12 noon: Eureka Memorial Committee Dinner at Ballarat.
For more information: http://www.eurekaballarat.com/index.php
Aceh
Sat Dec 4th, 9am-1pm, UTS Broadway,Achehnese Community of Australia
(ACA) seminar on human rights abuses in Aceh. Speakers include Ed Aspinall,
Justice John Dowd, etc. Contact Vacy (02)9949-3553. .
Films, Politics and Learning Conference
Organization: OVAL Research, Faculty of Education, University of Technology 6 & 7 Dec These nights aim:
- To bring together radical film-makers, radical film buffs, and radical educators.
- To inspire educators about ways they can use film in their work.
- To inspire film-makers about ways they might facilitate learning about politics.
- To foster discussion and advocacy about this field of practice.
We are seeking videos and films under 2 categories:
1. Agitprop: protest, guerrilla, activist, political, subversive short films /videos.
2. Participatory film-making: community films/videos as social intervention. The only format accepted is DVD.
Send copies with entry form to Celina McEwen, The Centre for Popular Education, UTS, PO Box 123, BROADWAY NSW 2007 AUSTRALIA. Deadline for entries is September 30, 2004. Entry forms can be downloaded from www.cpe.uts.edu.au/pdfs/FPLentry.pdf
For further information email Celina on (02) 9514 3847 or [email protected]
Dear Editor
We hear a lot of corporate and government leaders speaking about the greater
need for integrity, honesty, and systematic transparency. Yet, at a deeper
level we all feel let down by many of the broken promises they make,
however, that doesn't stop us from hoping that one day, a leader, or leaders
will actually deliver on what they continually promise.
In the meantime, what I would propose is a more critical approach in
assessing and challenging what our corporate and government leaders espouse
as ideal behaviours and actions and how that actually translates in 'real
life'. I call it 'Discussing Undiscussables', which is a reality based
approach that should bring us all greater protection from ourselves, because
let's face it, we have seen the enemy and the enemy is us. By keeping
silent about the obvious gaps between high sounding rhetoric and the failure
to 'walk the walk', we only have ourselves to blame.
Having said that, this is not as easy as it first sounds, because there are
obvious pitfalls associated with boldly challenging those in positions of
power. It is no fun being a lone 'whistleblower', in fact, you sometimes
stand a better chance of howling at the moon and being heard, than you do by
standing on your principles and being heard.
In order to illustrate what I mean, I have borrowed from the research of
others, such as Chris Arygris, who is Professor of Education and
Organisational Behaviour in the Graduate Schools of Education and Business
at Harvard University. Also worth noting is Eileen Shapiro, author of Fad
Surfing in The Boardroom and former consultant with McKinsey & Company, Inc.
The Barrier
The key emphasise of Arygris' research focuses on learning dysfunctions that
seriously inhibit organisational learning, he claims, �There is much that we
are not allowed to talk about in our organisations. Special codes of silence
mean a whole range of issues that ought to be discussed are not. People know
what can be discussed and what cannot. But, but not being able to talk about
some things seriously inhibits our capacity (individually and collectively)
to learn.�
Arygris is the pioneer of organisational learning, exploring the behaviours
that make an organisations smarter that it's competitors. His work predates
the more faddish 'learning organisation' of Peter Senge and others by
several decades.
He gave us the 'theory � in -use' and and theory � in � action' contrasts
that helps explain why leaders do different things from what they think they
do. When leaders explain why they do the things they do (their 'theory -in
-use') it is often the case that this does not match up with the actions
actually taken by those leaders (their ' theory � in -action).
Arygris gives us the concepts of 'single loop' and 'double loop' learning,
explaining why so many of us deal with problems without learning from them,
and thus are unable to prevent the same problems from arising again.
'Single loop' learning allows us to respond to a problem and fix it; 'double
loop' learning enables us to ask why the problem occurred in the first
place. If you can only do the first and not the second then you are likely
to be fixing a lot of the same problems over and over again (for those who
complain about being so busy putting out fires, that you are never able to
get around to doing real work, this will be obvious to you).
Undiscussable Issues
One of Arygris's more practical but underexploited concepts is the idea the
there are matters in all organisations that are simply undiscussable.
Further, the undiscussability of these matters is also undiscussable.
Even at a glance, this goes a long way towards explaining why sometimes the
people in organisations cannot see the wood for the trees, and continually
do things that are known to lead to failure. If a detour from the pathway
that is known to lead to failure involves wandering into undiscussable
territory, then we can predict that the organisation will press on with the
well known paths to proven failure. Such organisations cannot learn.
This anti-learning mechanism is explained by Arygris as 'primary inhibitory
loops'. He describes these as 'self � reinforcing patterns of action
strategies and anti-learning consequences'. Managers or politicians, in
trying to solve problems, tend to resort to tactics that prevent them from
speaking about situations truthfully. This leads them into a 'loop' of
avoiding the real problem, which is followed by more conversations that
avoid the real problem. After a bit of this, those involved in this process
all agree that they are wasting their time but don't understand why this is
the case. Everyone leaves the discussion feeling dissatisfied but not
knowing why nothing was achieved.
Leaders are trapped in these loops for various reasons (Arygris calls them
'conditions of error') such as vagueness, ambiguity, untestability,
scattered information, information withheld, undiscussability, uncertainty,
inconsistency and incompatibility. The 'undiscussability' error is common
knowledge to most people working in organisations. Most people know the
matters that cannot be raised openly in discussion in their organisation,
and if such matters are raised they are likely to be ignored. Such matters
are clearly known to all, but mentioned by none.
These loops are part of the phenomenon Argyris calls 'organisational defence
routines':
�These actions and policies, enacted within an organisation setting, that
are intended to protect individuals from experiencing embarrassment or
threat, while at the same time preventing individual's, or organisations as
a whole, from identifying the causes of embarrassment or threat in order to
correct the relevant problem.�
These routines are entirely logical and rule-driven. Essentially the logic
comprises four rules:
1.Craft messages that contain inconsistencies.
2.Act as though the messages are not inconsistent.
3.Make ambiguity and inconsistency in the message undiscussable.
4.Make the undiscussability of the undiscussable also undiscussable.
A simple but common example of how the rules apply is when a CEO announces a
new initiative, such as encouraging employees to be more innovative,
empowered, and customer � focused. Most employees go along with the new
initiatives despite knowing that the CEO does not mean it � those who act on
the new initiative (do something different, use their own judgement, refund
an unhappy customer) risk getting in trouble. Some do get into trouble and
are dealt with. The whole process is known as a charade but no one talks
about it in that way. The failure of the CEO's initiative is attributed to
other reasons, such as lack of commitment by employees. The initiative is
soon forgotten. The organisation has gained nothing and learned nothing.
Here are some other classic examples of typical 'undiscussables' that
should be familiar to everyone. Eileen Shapiro, presents it as 'The Rules
Of The Internal Game Balance Sheet' in her chapter on 'Decoding The
Corporate Culture'.
THE RULES OF THE INTERNAL GAME BALANCE SHEET
Espoused rule (sounds like a corporate asset)
Real rule (Functions as a corporate liability)
Quality comes first.
Get the tones out no matter what.
Never sell the customer something they don't need.
Get the order; he who books the most revenues gets the most goodies.
Innovate! We need innovation and we celebrate honourable failures.
No matter what, failure is a failure; it's far, far worse to have tried and
failed than to have never to have tried at all.
We take the long term-view of our businesses.
Miss your budget numbers and you're dead meat.
We have an open environment; speak up if you ever have a concern.
Accentuate the positive and just sublimate the negative (unless you have a
death wish)
Teams are our lifeblood.
Promotions go to individual contributors.
Developing our people is our most important task.
Managers who spend their time developing their people are weenies, neither
tough enough personally nor strong enough analytically to do the job around
here.
We are a learning organisation; help us improve continuously.
Don't rock the boat, or else!
Compensation is a private matter between you and your boss; do not discuss
it with others.
Share compensation numbers with peers; it's the only way to create a
reliable ruler for measuring how well you are doing.
We are a nonhierarchical collegial organisation and we follow the golden
rule of reciprocity in our treatment of each other.
Golden rule, ha!; I kissed up to my boss to get where I was going and now
you need to kiss up to me.
Run this business as if it were your own; manage for the long-haul.
Fast trackers never stay in the same job for more than two years so go after
actions that look big initially (but someone else has to implement) or that
give great initial results (no matter what the long � term costs).
Kind regards
John McPhilbin
It's little wonder the Labor Party flounders in the wilderness accused of standing for nothing. For a party founded on Socialist principles to be too afraid to appoint a shadow treasurer from the Left demonstrates the dominance of the pragmatic Right but for the Party to be too afraid to appoint a woman just about sums up Labor�s demise. Stand for nothing and no one will support you.
Dick McDermott
I invariably make incorrect predictions (or perhaps that should be "hopes" about the outcome of federal elections.
But this year I was expecting one of three possible scenarios:
The government returned with a smaller majority;
A hung parliament, which would require one or other of the major parties to form a coalition with a minor party;
A landslide victory for Labor.
Alas, as usual, I was way off the mark. But I daresay no one was more
surprised at the outcome than John Howard himself. He could have called a double dissolution election at any time in the past 12 months, with several of his pet policies having been rejected at least twice by the senate.
I was figuring that he was not confident of winning such an election, and so deferred the poll to the latest practicable time. It had to before the US election, because if Bush loses that, then this would go against Howard.
That said, I would guess that no one in the federal parliamentary Labor
Party, from Latham down, nor committed Labor voters could have anticipated such a disastrous result.
But how disastrous is it?
Well of course it means that Labor will have to wait at least three years or even six to stand a chance of forming a government again.
But in terms of what is favourable for Australia and Australians, perhaps another three years of Howard government may not be the terrifying prospect which dedicated Labor members and supporters feel it inevitably will be.
And why do I say this? Because the bulk of Howard�s policies have been borrowed from Labor in the first place. As I see it, this started about 18 months ago with the leaking to the media of a personal memo from Liberal President Senator Stone, to John Howard, suggesting to him that the electorate perceived him as: �mean, sneaky and out of touch.�
Howard responded immediately by introducing legislation after legislation that was specifically geared to appease any disquiet from that section of the populace that was drifting away from him.
And where did he get these policies? More than likely from the Labor party�s website, as they were typical Labor type policies.
Well he was pretty safe for some time after that, because of Simon Crean�s abysmal performance as leader of the opposition. Crean introduced no new legislation, and confined himself to harping about the "deficiencies" of the government.
Well that factor was factored out of the equation almost a year ago when
Mark Latham won leadership of the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party by a margin of one vote.
Well of course I don�t know whether Latham was self-seeking or sincere in his ongoing support of Crean up to that time. But if he HADN�T backed Crean, he most likely would never have made it to the front bench in so short a time, which proved to be his springboard to leadership of the party.
And then began the election campaign to end all election campaigns, as for all practical purposes it commenced from the day Latham became leader of the opposition. In the first two weeks he did more than Simon had done in two years, which of course resolved any doubts in the minds of anyone who had actually believed that Crean was a competent leader.
So Latham started to unravel his policies, which were radical and original.
And from that time right up to a day or so before the election, Howard played catch-up with Latham, mirroring his policies or trying to outdo Latham on some of them.
Suddenly Medicare, which the Liberal party had been trying to dismantle from the day Fraser replaced Whitlam in 1975, became a priority for Howard and Tony Abbott -- trying hard to rebuild Medicare and make the system even more tempting than the original ingenious concept introduced by Gough Whitlam.
And so it was with every policy that Latham announced -- Howard set out to match it, or present a more appealing alternative.
So, if Howard sticks with his election promises, most of his legislation will be quite similar to that which Labor would have introduced had it won the election. And what about those policies that are quite dissimilar to Latham�s, like industrial relations? Well Howard�s policy on these issues may well turn out to be more productive than Labor�s.
But what we can be assured of is that Howard will lose all interest in old growth forests and Kyoto, and will most likely water down his election promises, giving the excuse that changes in world economy have meant that he must be more frugal with his giant surplus budget, which he squandered recklessly in his obsession to win that fourth term and make his place in history.
It can also be taken for granted that he will continue to be subservient to America, no doubt at great expense to the welfare of Australia, as was his insane determination to follow his buddy, George Bush, into that illegal and stupid invasion of Iraq.
Time alone will tell, but reflecting on the issues I have mentioned, he may not actually totally destroy Australian society as most Labor supporters feel that he will.
Now this is not to say that I like the bugger -- the compulsive, unrepentant liar who is far more concerned with his own obsession for recognition and power than with what may be best for Australia and Australians.
However, if -- and that�s a big if -- he actually does fulfil most of his election promises, Australia may actually survive and even prosper.
And there STILL may be some really good news when the counting of votes for the senate is completed (possibly before this letter is published.)
On the last count the Greens looked like picking up that critical balance-of-power seat in the Senate.
But it might be even better if Family First wins the crucial seat. Visit their website and you will see that this fledgling party has policies covering all issues, and many if not most of these policies are NOT in accord with Howard's.
Julian Hancock
[If you have enjoyed my comments, you may care to visit my website www.julianchancock.com from time to time for the most important news items and comment -- and if you do, please click on the "E-Mail" tab on the Contents menu and send me your feedback.]
Gidday Mark,
I had a good chat with Christian Zahra in the main street of Trafalgar two weeks before the election. He asked to support his re-election bid but I told him honestly that although i would remain silent and not campaign against Labour (which i honoured) i could not support
Labour either and the best they would get would be 4th or 5th preference ahead of the stinking Liberals, Nationals and One Nation. In the Senate Labour was lucky to get the 50th preference with only the scumbags Liberal, National, One Nation behind.
When you are doing your review you may wish to keep in mind the way WORKERS have been shafted over the past 20 years and why your party now only gets preferences from workers ahead of the Conservatives. Labour will never hold government again in its own right if workers continue to vote such as this.
I feel i am wasting my time because you dont listen to us before an election so why would you listen to us now?
You say you went around the country listening to workers but i feel you must have had cotton wool stuck in your ears and you and your counterparts really are going around the country trying to sell what you want not what we want.
Each leader comes out after being defeated and says theyve listened to the people and theyve learned.I'll bet youve learned nothing about what we want from the Labour Party and our Union-Actu and what we want for our working lives to support our families and teach and raise,educate our children.
To end i would like to say whilst Labour acts as a pale imitation of the
scumbags the people will continue to vote for the scumbags.
Come out with pro worker policies and vision and the punters will come home to roost.
We dont want to be casual.
We dont want to be subcontractors when will you people get it.
We want consistent secure employment and a united LABOUR PARTY with a vision of Nation Building for Australia's future.I believe the workers will return to Labour when and only when these visions are realised and all architects of the worker ravaging accord are finally moved on.
Steven Presley
McMillan.
Yes, it's the ALP's election loss post mortem, where history is rewritten, mistakes are corrected and self-flagellation is a feel-good optional extra.
Workers Online is reluctant to join the conga-line of knockers; but we do have a serious beef with the post-election carry on which seems to be ignoring some obvious facts.
Labor lost the federal election for a few simple reasons: it's new leader had only been in the job 10 months; the government ran an effective scare campaign and the majority of the previous three years had been spent pursuing a media-driven agenda to wind back union influence in the party.
The punters voted for Howard because they are in debt to the eyeballs and he managed to fuse the ideas of Latham's inexperience with memories of high interest rates under Keating. It was a simple message hammered home again and again and again.
When pushed to justify his scare campaign, Howard would mouth off about industrial relations - but never with any underlying logic or conviction, just the mantra that his reforms stood for productivity (as if he invented enterprise bargaining).
But out of this campaign an orthodoxy is being written by the conservative press and business lobby that Labor's problem is that it is not a party of business.
History aside, the logic goes, it needs to trash its relationship with the union movement and, in the words of the execrable Financial Review, become a party of small business and contractors. Exc use me, I thought this was the Liberal's turf.
The tragedy is that Latham appears to be dancing to this tune - the clear messages coming out of the new front bench are that industrial relations policy is up for grabs and will be based on a closer dialogue with big business.
This is the same business lobby that has remained silent as James Hardie has perpetuated one of the most inhumane frauds in corporate history; whose reason for being is to cut back the sort of regulations that provide workers w it h protection, whose track record is to oppose Labor whatever policies it advances.
At the risk of being provocative in this period of mass revisionism, there was nothing wrong with Mark Latham's key policies before the last election.
Sure, he may have laboured the term "Ease the Squeeze" just a tad, but the squeeze is there and, with a few more months to push the issue, it has the capacity to reap real political dividends.
Central to easing the squeeze are decent rules for work; extra financial support for families, a health system that works - all the basic requirements for an alternative government are there.
Wrapped with a more aggressive social justice platform that respects all humans, be they indigenous, refugee, Iraqi or even Republicans, Labor would be eminently elect-able next time around - given just a little more familiarity with its leader, a positive policy agenda and some clear air to establish himself free of the internal fighting the current trajectory is sure to spark .
Labor does not require a divorce from the trade union movement to garner broader appeal. Indeed if Labor could only connect with rank and file members - about 40 per cent of whom voted for Howard - it would be implementing its agenda today.
No-one likes election nights which end with John Howard giggling, but the fear is that in dancing to the Tory tune, federal Labor will only be condemning itself to more nights of misery.
Peter Lewis
Editor
Search All Issues | Latest Issue | Previous Issues | Print Latest Issue |
© 1999-2002 Workers Online |
|