   |
||
| Issue No 26 |  |
13 August 1999 |
|
|
|
|
||
| Issue No 26 | |
13 August 1999 |
|
|
|
Releasing details of the August 24 lunch time rally, Labor Council secretary Michael Costa says NSW unions will attempt to apply the principles of organising to the public demonstration.
This means inviting workers to speak to the crowd about their experiences in industries as diverse as finance, retail hospitality, building, the public service and entertainment. A representative of the Oakdale miners has also been invited to address the rally.
"Every one knows that union leaders like myself are opposed to the Second Wave. What they want to know is how the changes will effect real workers," Costa says.
The march and rally will be hosted by Sydney diva Sue Cruikshank with music provided by the Wetsuits - a surf band boasting members of the Hoodoo Gurus, The Messengers and Weddings Parties Anything.
Details of the rally are: meet at Hyde Park North at 12 noon to march to the Prime Minister's office for a 1pm rally. Posters and fliers promoting the march are available from the union shop.
Thousands march across the nation
Meanwhile, the national campaign of second wave marches kicked off this week with big assemblies in South Australia and Victoria.
In South Australia, an estimated 12,000 workers and community members marched through the city - with major workplaces such as Mitsubishi, Holden, Bridgeston, transAdelaide and Submarine Corp shutting down.
SA Trades and Labor Council secretary Chris White says it was the biggest protest action the city had seen in many years.
And in Melbourne, Opposition leader Kim Beazley and ACTU President Jennie George addressed a crowd estimated at 60,000 people who marched through the city streets.
Speakers place pressure on the Australian Democrats to block the legislation in the Senate, with Beazley vowing to repeal the second wave changes under a future Labor Government.
We're looking for new and original chants for the August 24 March. If you can think of a ditty that sings, send it to us. The authors of any chants used will receive a free Piers T-shirt
The proposal has been tabled as coal employers commence court action to test tough anti-strike provisions in the Workplace Relations Act to personally give miners who walked off the job nationally in support of the 125 Oakdale families.
In a bizarre twist of justice, miners could be pursued by a government that refuses to secure their legal entitlements. With coal companies in the Supreme Court at press-time, the provocative act could lead to a major confrontation.
As mines around the country closed for 24 hours in support of Oakdale miners, the CFMEU has released details of a plan to recoup the money owing without costing the taxpayer a cent.
The coal industry's central Long Service Leave Fund has assets of $243 million and will be come completely self-supporting in January 2003, after which time employers will be freed from the minimal contributions they currently make to it.
By delaying the self-funding date by just six weeks, the CFMEU says all the Oakdale families could receive their rightful entitlements, which disappeared when their employer closed the mine, while continuing to operate other profitable businesses.
The CFMEU called the snap-strike after being swamped with demands for action across the industry.
The NSW union movement has vowed to support the miners in any protracted stoppage, with Labor Council secretary Michael Costa foreshadowing targeted action against the Howard Ministers who are refusing to act.
And all supporters are being urged to contribute to a fund established by the Transport Workers Union to assist Oakdale families struggling to meet mortgage and food bills.
More Political Chicanery
The strike was called after a meeting between representatives of the Oakdale miners and three Howard Government ministers - Reith, Fahey and Minchin - who cancelled an earlier meeting after all were on overseas trips.
The miners presented their simple proposal, but walked away empty-handed with the Ministers stonewalling until another meeting is held at the end of the month.
The Liberals were also putting tricks ahead of substance when it blocked a move by the Labor Opposition to bring on debate on legislation to ensure another Oakdale never occurs which has been lying dormant since before the 1998 election..
Labor Shadow Minister for Industrial Relations, Arch Bevis, attacked the Government for refusing to bring forward Labor's private member's bills, following indications by Peter Reith earlier this month that he would be prepared to look at the issue.
This is the text of the motion that the Howard Government blocked:
That the House:
1. condemns the Government for its failure to protect workers' legally accrued entitlements and its continued obstruction in not permitting Labor's private members bills on this issue to be debated;
2. condemns the Prime Minister for his continued support of the immoral practice by which employers use employee entitlements for day to day cash flow and investments as if these workers funds were an unsecured interest free loan to their employers
3. notes in particular the Prime Minister's defence of this practice in a radio interview with Alan Jones in which he said; "But the point I am making ... is that in reality, because of cashflow needs, many firms actually use this money for the day to day operation "
4. calls for Private Members' Business Orders of the Day Numbers 19 and 27 standing in the names of the Member for Brisbane and the Member for Prospect respectively, to be brought on forthwith, with a view to dealing with the issue of protecting employees' accrued entitlements without further delay.
Following the high-profile stand of mother of three Kym Wood, another Steggles worker Mhairu Saunders has contacted the Australian Services Union seeking reinstatement to her old position.
She quit the casual telemarketting position she held for 12 months after the company moved forward starting times which were inconsistent with her family responsibilities.
Her union has taken up the case with the company, arguing the resignation amounts to a constructive dismissal given the imposition of the unfriendly hours.
ASU state secretary Michael Want says this will be an important test of the company's resolve to implement family friendly workplaces in an inclusive way.
Want met with workers and company representatives today to discuss the rostering issue where it was agreed to trial a new system for four to six weeks that will allow Wood and other telesales workers some flexibility in starting times.
The flashpoint has been reached amidst growing concern of the impact of contracting out and competitive tendering in NSW country towns, driven by Transport Minister Carl Scully and his Road Transport Authority.
Scully is pushing on with competitive tendering, where big multinational companies compete for work against small local councils.
MEU state secretary Brian Harris says its a contest the councils just can't win, given the big companies often have economies of scale that allow them to offer artificially low prices to snare a contract.
Harris says what the accountants and bureaucrats who judge these contracts overlook is that for every country job lost, another 2.5 are lost in the flow-on. He's called for a full Social Impact Assessment before Scully drives any further down this path.
The union estimates more than 1700 rural jobs are at risk, totally gutting small towns where the local government is the largest employer. The northern NSW town of Kyogle, for example, has just lost 18 positions - a massive impact on the community.
When rural delegates were asked to vote to pay affiliation fees to the Labor party this week, Harris says there was great reluctance amongst the delegates. Ultimately, the MEU resolved to remain affiliated - but only to pressure for a review of contracting out policies at the October conference.
The MEU joins a growing number of unions including the CFMEU, the AWU, the RBTU and the ETU who have voice their disgust at the Carr Government's position on the issue. The MEU has earmarked September 16 for a major rally against the government.
Labor Council assistant secretary John Robertson says its important that unions can request the files, rather than forcing individual workers to make the requests.
The Australian Industrial Relations Commission issued a statement earlier this month "advising" but not ordering employers to make such records available in hard copy for workers.
The statement was issued amidst concerns that if computer systems crashed, leave records could be wiped leading to disputes about what entitlements workers had accrued.
Robertson says the government is considering issuing an order to all employers, but has yet to agree that unions' as well as individual workers should have the right.
"From where I sit, it makes sense," he says. "Why create extra work for everyone concerned by forcing an endless series of individual requests?"
The Labor Council's push to reignite its pay equity agenda through he creation of a new principle reached in the words of NSW Industrial relations Commission president Justice Wright a "low point" in the Commission this week.
It what can only be described as a "verbal exchange", Labor Council advocate Chris Christodoulou and the president locked horns over how the Commission might determine the status of its own report not pay equity
Unions are arguing the Commission should accept the findings of the two-volume , 12-month, taxpayer funded Ministerial Inquiry into Gender Pay Equity as the basis for establishing new equal remuneration principles.
But employer groups say the Commission and should not and can not led any weight to Justice Glynn's ... -page report, meaning unions would be expected to re-run arguments accepted during the inquiry that women's work is undervalued.
In this week's hearing, Labor Council argued that it may have to "review its position with respect to the application" if it was not clear as to how the report might be used in the proceedings.
Following a full bench hearing, the Labor Council has committed itself to taking its application forward even though the status of the report is still up in the air.
It seems the question of whether the Commission will take notice of its own report will not be determined until the hearings on the equal remuneration principal, which will take place in February of next year.
The FSU had requested the deferral after receiving what it described as an "inadequate" response from the pro-demutualisation Members First ticket.
That team has now responded to survey questions on their attitudes to demutualisation as well as industrial issues such as job security, permanent employment, customer service levels and support for collective agreements and awards.
FSU state secretary Geoff Derrick says that while tickers differ on the issue of demutualisation, there is now a broad commitment to collective bargaining, job security and adequate staffing levels.
by Liam Phelan
A recent study revealed dangerously high lead levels in all ceilings in Sydney's eastern suburbs. Some ceilings returned levels as high as 20,000 parts per million (ppm). Levels above 2,000ppm are considered a high risk.
Ceiling dust can be a deadly mix of cadmium, arsenic, asbestos, pesticides and biological contaminants.
According to a letter by Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon: "Residents and workers in 'Tarptown' are not generally aware of the risks."
Insurance companies have agreed to pay for ceilings to be vacuumed before roofing work starts, according to CFMEU roofing organiser Malcolm French.
"If workers get covered in dust it can be very harmful. We're saying don't start fixing a roof until all the ceiling dust has been safely removed."
by Deirdre Mahoney
The Sex Discrimination Cmr was speaking at the Independent Education Union's annual women's conference in Sydney in advance of the 25 August launch of her 350-page report into pregnancy discrimination in the workplace.
She said the "very sad" report proved that "the sort of things people thought were long gone" were still a concern, but said pregnancy complaints, which constitute 15% ("just the tip of the iceberg") of complaints she received were just the start.
One highly successful woman who worked for a $50 million company was denied her annual salary increase, despite a performance review that praised her work, her intelligence and her dedication. The problem? Her male colleagues found her "difficult" to get along with. The reason? She had dropped out of the footy-tipping competition!
When she told her boss she'd never been interested in sport, he urged her to read the sports results before going to work on Monday morning. "If she could comment on how well Shane Warne was bowling, her colleagues would feel more comfortable, and if she improved her efforts in that area, she may get the salary increase next year," Cmr Halliday told the conference. "Needless to say, she won her case."
Cmr Halliday warned "there are those amongst us who want to take us back to the 19th century, on the eve of the 21st century", citing letters she'd received saying the Sex Discrimination Unit was a "cancer", "rotting the fabric of society". These people were dangerous because they had the "mindset, power and influence" to affect what politicians thought.
She said many employers still had no idea about the provisions of the Federal Sex Discrimination Act, which have been in place for 15 years. One of these bans recruiting, or intending to recruit, on the basis of gender. This ban was obviously unknown to those writing ads calling for "bored housewives aged between 35 and 50", or women who wanted to add some sparkle to their lives by working for a "charming, always dashing and always gentlemanly" boss. One of these ads was written not by the boss, but by a newspaper editor!
She urged women at the conference to always be vigilant themselves and to help younger women realise the importance of protecting their working conditions and rights. She said while a study had shown that 70% of young women under 20 believed they would meet "Mr Right" and be supported, this would apply to only 8% of them. "The reality is most women will work, and it's discriminating against girls and leveraging them into poverty by not helping them realise this is so."
In the same week as NSW women celebrated the 30th anniversary of the first equal pay decision, Cmr Halliday reminded the women at the conference that 'we are still pioneers" and asked them, if they thought any differently, to ask why it was that male teachers in private schools got paid higher rates than female teachers. The pride and pleasure women had in thinking about what had been gained for the younger generation was tempered by the realisation that discrimination against them had not disappeared, just become more indirect and covert.
The pregnancy inquiry report will be available on the web on Wednesday, 25 August at www.hreoc.gov.au
Equal pay anniversary
Like Cmr Halliday's, the main message arising from a gathering at the State Library this week to celebrate the 30-year anniversary of the first equal pay decision was that, no matter how far we've come, we've got a long way to go.
The 1969 advocate for the ACTU, former PM Bob Hawke, could not attend but sent a message to the 140-strong crowd drawn from unions, Government, employers and other supporters stressing that "much still remains to be done to create an economy and a society where all vestiges of discrimination based on gender are eliminated."
Hawke said in his message that although the 1969 decision represented a "hard fought step forward" in wage justice for women, only 18% of female employees benefited from it, because part of the decision ruled that "equal pay should not be provided when the work in question is essentially or usually performed by females but is work upon which male employees may also be employed".
He said it was "one of the tragedies of that time" that then President of the Commission, Sir Richard Kirby, was told only a week before the case was due to begin that heart problems meant he could not sit on the bench. Hawke said he had always believed the outcome would have been "much better" had this not happened.
Still, he said, occasions like this served not only to "remind us of past battles, but to encourage all of you who are committed to winning that fight".
The man who helped win that fight for the workers of NSW, former Premier Neville Wran, told the crowd the arguments of pay cases 30 years ago would have people rolling on the floors of the Cmn these days. Wran, who represented the Federated Clerks Union in the state's first pay equity case in 1973, had his words echoed by MLC President Meredith Burgmann, who spoke of the equal pay fights heroines and villains.
Among the major villains she cited were many Coalition MPs who argued inane things like women should not be given equal pay because that meant they'd have to pay their own way on dates, or "Give them equal pay and next they'll want to be sitting in bars and having beers with you."
The crowd also heard from Betty Spears, who as deputy president of the Clerks Union dared Wran to take on the case. Spears was also head of the Labor Council's equal pay committee, and recalled the annual discussion on equal pay, when the men attending Labor Council meetings (excluding the officials) got up and headed for the pub. She took soapbox discussions on the issue to Belmore Park, for workers, and recalled gathering in the ladies' room at the ACTU congress in 1959 to plan the agenda as a surprise for the men who wanted to knock it off.
by Deirdre Mahoney
DIR Director-General Warwick McDonald said the unit, which has been set up to improve the employment conditions of indigenous workers, has already discovered that those likely to use its services are unlikely to be a member of a union, despite the collective ideals unions uphold.
DIR has been developing the kit over the past 10 months, after learning that:
· there are low levels of use of DIR's existing services by indigenous people
· there are low levels of knowledge about employment and industrial rights and obligations demonstrated by managers of organisations which employ indigenous people
· the status of award coverage is unclear for some organisations covering indigenous workers
· there was a low level of recognition in awards and EAs of the family and social obligations faced by indigenous workers, and
· existing efforts needed to be supported.
McDonald's message was reinforced by Julie Smith, who worked with the Department to develop a new culture. She explained that indigenous workers did not have the same "self-encased" view of responsibility as other Australian workers. They were taught a collective responsibility and understanding of that by unions and others who believed in collectivism could lead to a path for negotiation.
Indigenous workers can contact the telephone hotline service on 1300-361 968 for the cost of a local call, and the kit, which gives information to both managers and employees on indigenous employment issues, is available from DIR.
by Phil Davey
"The Big Drum Up for East Timor" takes place on Friday night September 3rd from 7:30PM at the Harbourside and features some of the best percussionists and exponents of World Music on the planet, including Epizo Bangoura of Mali, Deva Permana of Indonesia and Indian Tabla supremo Bobby Singh.
Other feature acts for the night include all female band "Night Flight to Venus" and Master Percussionists Greg Sheehan and Blair Greenberg. Entrance for the night is $10.
A recent APHEDA delegation to East Timor found that food and medicine is being deliberately withheld from East Timorese communities in the lead up to the referendum. The APHEDA East Timor Emergency Appeal seeks to literally keep these communities alive and provide alternative food and medicine until freedom is won.
Jose Ramos Horta stressed in Sydney last month that now is the time to support East Timor. Hopefully by Christmas it will all be over and an appalling 24 years of
murder torture rape and genocide will be history.
The money raised from the "big drum up" will enable Timorese communities to hang on until then.
As the "big drum up" will take place on the Friday after the referendum on independence organisers are hopeful the event will turn into somewhat of a victory party if/when the independence vote gets up.
The concert has been arranged at short notice so any assistance with publicity and promotion would be greatly appreciated. Tickets will be available at the door on the night, but for enquires or if you wish to pre purchase tickets, please call Deidre Mahoney at NSW Labor Council on 9264 1691, or Phil Davey at the CFMEU on 9394 9494.
The trip will include a public forum, co-hosted by Workers Online, to be held in Trades Hall on Wednesday September 8.
Eric will chart the rise of the Internet, outline how some trade unions and other community groups have harnessed it and set out some signposts for the future.
This will be an interactive forum, with the audience encouraged to participate in the discussions.
Stick that one in your diary/palm pilot and watch Workers Online for further details
Fliers to promote the Lecture are available from the Union Shop - 377 Sussex Street, Sydney
For full details see the Fire Brigade Employees' Union's latest update:
http://fbeu.labor.net.au/media/20000229_awdnegs7.html
Dear all at Workers Online
Although PiersWatch is by far my favourite part of Wednesday mornings rest assured that even if the hypocritical old git does mellow out you've gained a lot of new readers who are interested in what you have to say about Unionism and Industrial Relations generally.
Workers Online is far more than just an opportunity to bag Piers so cheer up and (please don't let me be speaking too soon) be proud that you've perhaps knocked a bit of sense into his addled and paranoid mind.
Keep up the good work
H Robson
Please can you shed some light on the DoCS issue(NSW) where they are selling off group homes with no real interest for the clients in the care of workers. some off which have worked for long periods off time.
Not only are they being moved on to the highest bidder, but more to the point those without the ability to defend themselves and rely on the help & support from the Gov are be sold like common cattle.
Tell me this is not true and if so how many gorup homes where the clintes have lived together for long periods of time, and are like borther and sister to each other will now be seperated. are they now going to be uprootred form the home they once new.or will it be sold off. families split and DoCs staff put out off work also, who cares for the carers and those that cant help themselves..
Steve Ryan
I have supported Labor {both State and Federal} since I started work as an apprentice and became old enough to vote {1970}. I watched that job I held for twenty-two years become redundant under a Greiner Liberal Government.
Now a job I have held for several years is soon to become redundant, {due to privatisation of our maintenance workshop at the Prince of Wales Hospital Randwick} arranged by a Carr "Labor?" Government.
The "Liberal" tactics used by the Carr Government to make state workers totally humiliated and pushed into "voluntary" redundancies. So that Government assets can be sold-off to pay for {I believe} badly managed Government Departments and an Olympic Games?
What we are being subjected too has also been experienced by State Rail, DOCS, RTA and the Power Industry.
All by a Labor government!
The Prince of Wales Hospital owns a Car Parking Station that holds in excess of two thousand cars this was as I understand it, leased to a private company for twenty years for a cash pay-out {in my opinion a virtual goldmine, lost}.
Now they {the Prince of Wales} are going through the processes of leasing the Plant Rooms {for twenty years} and privatising the Maintenance Workshop for the same period. Some staff may be required by the contractor the others, can take a voluntary redundancy, although we are not sure as everything is hush, hush, and it will be another two weeks before we find out anything. Not surprising as they told us we would know our futures by last May!
What about when all the Public Assets have been sold off!
What then?
How about Mr Carr looking into the managerial expertise of his so-called managers in Government Departments, especially in the Health Department.
Ask about:
- Their qualifications {lack of technical knowledge and management nous}
- Their expensive mistakes derived from their decisions {wrong equipment purchased and then discarded, or the necessity to purchase additional equipment to augment the short falling's of previously purchased equipment, to name a few}
- Their understanding of the workplace they manage
- Their understanding of being frugal without cutting services {waste}
- Purchase of equipment out of their depth, ie. Without understanding the availability of spare parts or the cost or actual down time required, not to mention training required to service said equipment. {training?}
- The inefficient use and control of contractors
- The use of in-house staff to fix up contractors work, who have already been paid and gone. {Who will fix it up when we are gone, another contractor!}
- Bob Carr is always telling US to use Public Transport, BUT every manager's job comes with a {leased} car as part of their package as it does right across the board of State Government Departments.
It appears to me that all cost savings start at the lower end of the workers scale, because it is easy, instead of tackling the problem where it really lies and always has!
It is my opinion that these Managers believe that by letting contracts they will be devoid of any responsibilities and can sit back and peruse their mountaining superannuation.
It is easy to make maintenance workers, cleaning staff etc. redundant, the insignificant savings are only temporary as the real cause of the problems are still in place and will remain in place whether the actual work is done by private contract or not.
Name Withheld By request
The NSW state government has clearly imposed a wage freeze on all NSW public servants. The recent budget clearly failed to set aside any funds for salary increases to workers in the public sector.
It is believed, from Treasury information, that the Carr government has no intention of negotiating with Teachers, nurses, fire officers, etc, until at least the year 2001.
Are we to stand by and watch our wages erode before our eyes as the new sports venues for the Olympics increase in size and expense?
It is time for all Public sector unions to join together and force Carr to make funds available for real and substantial wage increases. If this requires statewide industrial action, so be it.
I know teachers have had a gut- full of increased workloads, diminishing working conditions, increased casualisation and public school teacher pay rates that now lag behind that of private school employees.Time to unite in act
M Berg
by Peter Lewis
John Howard is the master of small politics. He showed it in 1996 and 1998, wrapping himself into a little ball of nothingness and taking the people with him, away from the Big Picture and the grand possibilities of an inclusive, progressive Australia at ease with its place in the world to a land frozen in apathy, self-interest and a misguided certainty.
Now he's poised to do the same thing to the Republic, turning what should be a story about our independence into a pedantic debate between the lawyers. Playing on the divisions Republicans themselves created, he has manipulated his beloved Monarch into the frontrunner in November. You have to admire his determination as he's shrewdly steered the debate away from the questions to which he has no answers. Like a loyal soldier protecting the castle of the colonial ruler from the marauding hordes.
For those of us who have always believed in a Republic the recent plays risk us seeing defeat snatched from the jaws of victory. As we battle it out over appointment versus direct election, Howard sits backs smugly watching the bombs (aka Peter Reith) go off. It's as if Jason Li's Constitutional Convention compromise of a public nomination process was never reached. Unfortunately the Republican camp has been sucked into Howard's web - the lure for a bunch of over-achieving lawyers has been too great to resist. Not that they shouldn't engage in the debate about the detail, just that the central question has been lost in all the tedious minutae.
At the end of the day we're talking about who we are - where our law ends: in the hands of a hereditary ruler from a country that invaded the continent 200 years ago, or in the hands of an Australian chosen from the people, the descendants of pioneers from all around the globe who have followed the proud of tradition of 40,000 years or more of standing on their own feet on this harsh and beautiful continent.
The preamble is another clever trick. Nice words, sure - particularly being honest enough to 'hope in God' rather than having the certainty to 'trust' in the existence of any Divine being. But at the end of the day the words meaning nothing. It is no American Declaration of Independence, just a few dot-points with no legal status. It's another Howard diversion serving duel purposes: (i) glossing over the outrage that there is still no treaty of reconciliation with indigenous Australia; and (ii) drawing votes away from conservative Republicans with the idea that the preamble is enough change for now.
If you think back to the middle of this decade, its amazing the Republican cause is stuck in this position of facing defeat. The vision Keating enunciated of an open, optimistic, independent nation - engaged in its region and ready for the challenges of the Information Age seem but a distant memory. The backlash whipped up by Wedge Politics and poor political selling has left the nation in a mood of denial. Hold on tight and the wave of change will pass. But it won't. And nor should it.
We have continually underestimated the rat cunning of a master politician to make things seem smaller. But we've also done our own cause an injustice. The focus on celebrities and media opportunities hasn't worked - its backed the Republican cause into a corner where it is accused of being elitist. This is all the more amazing when think about the relative wealth and income of your average defender of the realm - Kerry Jones may act like a bumbling battler but her Dad's a multi-millionaire! In an era when communications are changing quickly, the Republicans have adopted the old 'interest group' approach to politics, get enough representatives of different groups involved and you speak for the majority. The problem is the representatives can't deliver.
At this point what should be done? Do we keep reacting on Howard's terms and try to win the legal debate or do we try to blow the whole thing wide open?
One place to look for guidance could be the union movement and its attempts to reconnect with its base. Remember when unions represented half the workforce? Seems along time ago now. Through the Accord years the large unions became institutions which delivered benefits for their members from the top down. The members forgot they were members as the pay rises flowed automatically down the line. If they had a problem they'd contact the union and it would (or wouldn't) be sorted out. Unions are currently evolving from this institutionalised service model to a more organic organising model. The modern union official is focussed on skilling workers to solve their own problems rather than flying in like Superman to solve it for them. And it's working - organised workplace create their own strength, their own sense of belonging from the ground up.
How could the Republican movement adapt this model to help win the referendum?. The focus must be on organising public events that are entertaining enough to draw people in and send them away with a sense of ownership of this project. Republicans from trade unions, the ALP, the Democrats. even the conservatives need to work together on an area basis, devising ways of engaging with their friends and neighbours. Family picnics, fundraising concerts, stalls at shopping centres - building a base of people who are prepared to give just a bit of their time to make things happen. The campaign can not be top down because it will just be another election. We need to take it to a different level where the heart and the soul over-ride the cynicism of these dismal times. Ideas like the Republic book are good symbols for this type of project, asking ordinary Australia's to sign up to be a Founder. These could be provided at all events - becoming a data base of those prepared to help spread the word for change.
But the message we disseminate is vital too. No-one, apart from lawyers, is going to get excited about a technical debate. We need to broaden it right out. We should be asking people to "Look Forward to a Republic", promoting it with a sense of courage and optimism that we are a smart enough nation to cut in the global world, with our own identity and our own symbols. It's time to seize the nettle that Keating grasped and recognise that just because he lost in 1996 doesn't mean his vision of an open-looking, inclusive society was just another failed policy. It is the only way forward.
We need to repackage this big-hearted agenda and make it our own again - from the ground up. We need to tell and hear the stories of ordinary people who have made this country their home, contributing their courage and optimism to stand alone. We need to be the forces looking forward into history, not clinging to the past. We need to paint on a broad canvass that is bigger than the solicitors' note pad. Because if we successfully raise the stakes to this degree I just can't see a majority of my compatriots voting "no" with Little Johnnie.
For those who haven;t participated in a net chat before, its a wild, incontrollable beast. Questions and comments come from all angles, piling on each other, until an easy, good-humoured rhthym of communication develops. It's all about letting go and letting the chat session develop iots own life.
Here is a transcript of the session...
Session Start: Tue Aug 10 19:01:40 1999
workers Looks like Kate's here. Thank you all for logging on ... first up
Kate, what are your credentials? When did you start using the net?
Kate I started using the net in about 1994 - Mosaic, fortunately Netscape was available soon after
*** Guest18195 has joined #Lobby
*** Guest01175 has joined #Lobby
workers How do you use the technology in your role as a politican?
*** Guest18195 is now known as blah
*** Guest01175 is now known as Reggie
Kate I have my own web page and that is starting to be very useful for sharing information and dialogue with people on-line
*** Guest54138 has joined #Lobby
Reggie Do you get many hits on your own page?
Kate I also have a petition and feedback forms
workers In your IT portfolio I gues there's lots of issues ... but throw us a few of the dilemmas you have trouble resolving in terms of policy ?
*** Guest54138 is now known as siege
Kate Reggie, I have about had about 3000 hits recently, most of which have occured sonce the Online services bill hit the parliament
Reggie I attended a rally in Brisbane earlier in the year against the Bill, I am a union offical and I look after my union web page. Will Reith now be able to come after me.
Kate Policy-wise, our primary consideration should be equity of access to the internet m- this means regional connectvity and skills. All the initiatives on line mean little if you don't have access.
galangal Don't you think there's more to it than just access?
siege Who is the member of the house of representatives for canning/perth?
galangal Sorry to cut accross you 'workers'..Kate...a lot of Labor policians are very tied-up with the issue of access to the Internet and I agree it is important but net net poses a whole range of issues for ever aspect of society .
Kate Hopefully he has better things to do. I think the Govt really underestimated the response to the on-line services bill and hopefully they will learn the error of their ways on IR
*** Guest32525 has joined #Lobby
Kate On other aspects, of course - particulalry privacy, digital economy, security etc - what are you particularly interested in?
siege wat other channel r there and how do u join them
*** Guest86772 has joined #Lobby
YAPSTER Siege - just start up your own room chipper, I am sure you can have a renegade chat elsewhere
*** Guest29419 has joined #Lobby
galangal I think the Internet proposes to findamentally challenge the concept of the National State - accelerate the rate of globalisation
siege kate: who is the member of the house of representatives for canning/perth?
*** Guest32525 has quit IRC (QUIT: )
*** siege has left #Lobby
galangal Furthermore it changes totally the way people communicate - take this chat room for instance - ten years ago the concept would have been bizarre
Kate Canning, Jane Gerick
*** Guest68208 has joined #Lobby
workers Hi to those just logging on. we're just charting a few of the issues the net poses politicans - access, content, etc.
*** Guest29419 is now known as Tim
KateGlobalisation - particularly with respect to digital product and our capacity to compete, success means jobs here.... There are broader concepts like the nation state and the prevalence of 'groups of people with common interests emerging across national borders,
Kate I agree, chat provides an amazing opportunity for me to talk with people that would otherwise never occur - email too.
*** Guest69825 has joined #Lobby
Reggie I am concerned that people will set up their sites on overseas sites to avoid scrutiny and expenses. Is this a possibility?
galangal It accelerates the rate of human interaction and the spread of human ideas..analogous to the printing press...what challenges do you think this poses for the policy makers...beyond access
*** Guest86772 is now known as Paul
Paul What steps can be taken to ensure Australians can afford to access the net, especially those on low or no income
JulianO Kate should the ALP start to develop futher its 'cyber campgian strategy.' The ALP website was very usful last election but how else could we develop ways to get our message across the net.
Kate There are two themes - one is the changing nature of power - information, once scarce will be prolific empowering many and placing pressures on those who have used previously to assert themselves - also the management of intellectual propoerty - what will constitute value in the future? If it is IP, how will it be shared in a digitial environment?
galangal Reggie - the whole point of the Internet is its global, you can't control it...and it doesn't matter where you are located geographically...one of the key challenges for governments is comming to terms with this
*** Guest68208 has quit IRC (QUIT: )
workers Guys, guys - i think we need to give kate some space! enough questions for a sec.
Kate On the ALP cyber-campaign... There are so many ideas, but I believe the key is to use the web to rebuild relationships with the electorate...The central sites are great but I encourage all elected representatives to explore how they can use the web for themselves
*** Guest54912 has joined #Lobby
galangal I agree - freer infromation flow will break down hierarchies - eg just thing about what Austlii is doing to the Lawyers
Kate Reggie, you are right, from a social perspective there will be no homogeneity - everyone will use it differently - this is chaos - John Ralston Saul has a great line for valuing this as an essential feature of a healthy democracy.
galangal I don't see that that our approach towards intelectual property will funamentally change - however I think the Internet will become the main forum in which it is exhanged - sales of books & CDs on the the Internet are booming
Paul Everybody who has access will use it differently, sure, but how can people be provided with access to the net at reasonable cost is the question Australia has to answer
YAPSTER What about the underlying values driving Labor in the Info Age? The orthodoxy has the individual triumpging over the collective. How does our side of politics answer this?
Kate Paul, affordable access is essential - it is almost everyday that someone liken the net to 'traditional' essential infrastructure...
YAPSTER I think the cost is beginning to come down now. It will take a while longer yet, but tv began in the same way...
galangal and telephone and newspaper...books..reading & writing
workers In fact, today's paper has Gates giving away pc's and net access to get people into his e-commrece web ... in a way groups like unions have what the big boys want - a network of people
galangal in the UK they are offering internet access unlimited at the cost of a local call
Kate the values? For labor it is about creating communities of common interest - on-line or elswhere - There is an indecent emphasis on the economic oopportunities and very little on the social opportunities. The Internet is a tool for reducing inequities, provided the policy emphasis is there...
galangal loyalty is where the value is in todays society..in the post industrial age goods like computers and modems are becomming cheaper & cheaper as they are able the disperse their R&d cost over a greater number of sales * galangal smiles at everyone in the room :-)
*** Guest54912 has quit IRC (QUIT: )
Kate For example, geographic isolation is a challenge for cost of connectivity, but the immediacy of the net and interactive nature removes so many barriers.
galangal Everyone is thinking about how the net will affect business and bring down costs..I think that just a sideshow the real game is the communities of interest it will build...beyond National boundries
*** Guest50839 has joined #Lobby
*** blah has joined #Lobby
* galangal smiles at everyone in the room :-)
Reggie Do you have any thoughts about the growing technical developments to monitor the net and individuals on it, Chip serial & id numbers for instance
*** Guest50839 has quit IRC (QUIT: )
*** Guest72878 has joined #Lobby
Kate a la clipper chip? - Serious privacy legislation required. I have grave concerns on the incredible manipulation that can and does already occur. Particularly when massive national databases of citizen's data are available with very little protection....
* Guest72878 wants to come inside.
JulianO Kate is there any chance you could get www.alp.org.au to set up a online forum or chat room
YAPSTER I'm just going to make room for some more people *** YAPSTER has quit IRC (QUIT: )
Kate Julian...we have looked at our own chat site and figure it is better resource and access wise to use fora such as this at the moment, but as we continue to experiment, I can see a chat room becoming a regular event in my week...
galangal You're beginning to like it??
workers JulienO; this is what we're trying to get hapopening - tongiht's event is sponsored by NSW Labor Council using the yap chatroom - we also put out a weekly paper which, we hope, will soon have a chatroom .-.that's an online paper of course ..
*** Guest72878 has left #Lobby
Kate I just have to remember to keep an eye on the time - I have to give speech on the Republic soon
*** blah has quit IRC (QUIT: )
workers no worries, we could almost keep this going without you! one question - what happens to local content in TV and radio when we start broadcasting on the net? how can we ever regulate net content?
galangal I've got to go too...thanks for you time Kate & answering our questions!
* galangal is going to be away from the channel.* galangal forgot to hit the breaks!*** galangal has quit IRC (QUIT: )
JulianO thank you kate for the time you have given up tonite
Kate Ah, content my favourite - if it being broadcast, sourced from Australia, it can be regulated.... of course the way down the track digital content will be prolific and loyalty derived from quality and brand will feature. This is why any investment in the production of quality content now is worthy - public investment...
Kate my pleasure to be here - I don't have to go just yet... on regulation, we can never regulate the net, we can help and support internet users.
*** Guest79976 has joined #Lobby
workers But how?? - is it like the ABC model of public broadcasting or an Australia Council model of supporting worthy projects or an Austrade model of finding viable investment ideas ... or a bit of all of these?
*** Guest79976 has quit IRC (QUIT: ) *** Guest85827 has joined #Lobby
Kate I think a bit of all, there is no doubt that the early movers will attain some loyalty, so for Australia to develop a global reputation for quality content, we need to get to it
workers OK, so if Im a young website designer - how will a Labor government support me get my project up?
*** Guest37187 has joined #Lobby ** Guest37187 is now known as YAPSTER
Reggie I have enjoyed the chat but my link is too slow. Lets do this again sometime. I have to go now *** Reggie has quit IRC (QUIT: ) *** Guest69825 has quit IRC (QUIT: )
YAPSTER Kate, When do you think uni students will start doing courses in web content development rather than just design ?
Kate I like to think that there will be a far greater recognition of new media within the arts area, as well as supporting new private initiatives, either collaborative arrangement or start-ups. Nothing specific as yet on the policy front, but it is recognised as being important...
JulianO Kate has the party ever thought of setting up a e-mail list that could let people know, say, once a week on updates to www.alp.org so as to keep people visiting the page and therefore interested in the lastest issues and the ALPs position on them by reading press releases etc etc???
Kate Yes and I think that will become a reality. The ALP national site is evolving all the time. I have thought about that for my own site, but at this stage don't update it comprehensively enough each week with current issues - I usually email those who I know have a specific interest in what I am up too.. I will raise the issue with the national office for their sirte however.
workers kate, Julian - its actually in the pipeline - a weekly news sumary later this year..
workers We've got about ten minutes left - anyone else got an issue they want to raise? I see Fredo lurking silently!!
JulianO oh btw, kate you were great on good news week!
*** Guest86767 has joined #Lobby *** Guest86767 has left #Lobby
Kate Thanks I'm still getting over it - the party afterwards was great
Fredo Kate, do you have a position on the republic
workers I reckon Ten's interesting - look at The Panel and Good News Week and its a bit like aan online chatroom - i reckon they're the closest to coming to terms with the new media!?
* Guest85827 opens the door and steps inside.
Kate I'm a republican.
JulianO get rid of queeny poo
Tim An Australian for a head of state please!!
Kate The ABC is the best at developing relationships between the different media -look at the J radio and web interaction,
workers Especially compared with channel Nine which just treat ninemsn as a billboard with ecommerce opportunities
JulianO here here
*** Guest56875 has joined #Lobby
JulianO i wanna be PM one day
Tim So does Peter Reith!!!
YAPSTER Just letting you all know that this time next week, Liz Ellis, of the Sydney Swifts will be our guest - if any of you are into netball or women's sport in general.
* Guest85827 opens the door and steps inside.
Kate To the republic!! Say hi to Liz for me
JulianO but Reith has every worker in OZ hating him
Fredo just as well he has gone to the NO side.
Kate Reith has held just about every position there is on the republic...
YAPSTER Looks like we're running out of sense here ... thanks heaps for joining us tonight ... we''ll be doing regular political yap's ... and if you don't already look au Workers Online every friday at labor.net.au ..
Kate Good to be here - thankyou all
Tim thanks to workers online!!!
JulianO thanks yap and kate and workers online
Kate It is a great initiative - the start of something big
workers bye everyone ... until next time . kate lundy for pm!
JulianO here here
*** Kate has quit IRC
Session Close: Tue Aug 10 20:05:11 1999
Summary
While the script may read disparately, but after Siege blew the scene, we all walked away with a sense of connection. After all, how often do you sit a chat with another dozen people for an hour?
Workers Online will now organise regular Political Yaps - and Kate has expressed interest in introducing some of her more luddite colleagues to the medium. So watch this space for further details.
by Zoe Reynolds
Australian seafarers outperform crew from the traditional maritime nations of Europe as well as the Flag of Convenience states, like Panama, according to a report released this July.
The study "How Competent are Ships Crews? Results of a study of 4,500 ships" is by Professor Tony Lane from the Seafarers International Research Centre, Cardiff University.
It comes at a time when 'the crews of convenience' issue has been highlighted by the oil spill in Syndey Harbour. The crew on board the Italian flagged Laura D'amata is a mix of Filipino ratings and Italian officers.
The report also comes at a time of growing controversy over Australian Government plans to further deregulate the industry, allowing more foreign ships and crew into our coastal trade.
The Howard Government has even proposed replacing Australian seafarers on Australian vessels with more poorly trained (and poorly paid) guest workers.
The government sponsored Shipping Reform Working Group, however has questioned the wisdom of this policy. The Australian daily (13/7/99) reported that the Group instead recommends government industry funding and on-going protection for Australian shipping. The Howard Government, however, still intent on getting rid of the MUA workforce, has refused to make their report public.
The Cardiff study assesses deck officers and ratings in a cross-section of the world's merchant ships trading out of Europe, Africa, Asia and Australasia. It was undertaken in response to growing concern over crew competency in the industry.
"Underwriters, senior managers of shipping companies, port officials and officers of maritime regulatory agencies, ship's masters and chief engineers were all contributors to the emerging collective view," Professor Lane writes.
Competency was assessed by inviting professionals in the industry to assess ship conditions, crew performance and communications on board the vessel.
Pilots, for example, were asked to rank a vessel's standard of boarding, condition on deck, accommodation and wheelhouse as very good, good, average, bad or very bad. The pilot was then asked to rank crew by teamwork, rope handling, efficiency of watch keeping, ship's position as plotted by officer, communications, efficiency of the helmsman, use of radar, tuning of radar, and efficient handling of emergency if applicable and whether crew were at their stations when the pilot boarded the vessel to bring it into the harbour.
Pilots were also asked to note whether they used English or sign language to communicate with the master, watch officer and helmsman.
The survey found that competency levels were higher overall on gas and chemical tankers and container ships, and lowest on general cargo, oil tankers and bulk vessels.
Crew on Black Sea Rim and People's Republic of China flagged vessel scored the lowest on average, (68 and 69) while Australiasian crew boasted top scores of 88, above Northern European (83), German (83), Western European (82) Second and international registers (80).
The Panama Flag of Convenience, which now dominates the world's shipping industry, scored a low 73 average for crew competency.
In addition individual crew from the Black Sea, PRC, Eastern European, African, Middle Eastern, Japanese, South American, Panamanian and other FOC vessels had the highest incidence of low scores ranging from one in four (Black Sea) to one in 10.
One factor influencing crew competency is communication. While Britania no longer rules the waves, English does. Crew from less developed countries with less education opportunities are therefore disadvantaged.
Professor Lane stresses in his report that competency levels are not a matter of race: "If citizens of some countries show themselves as being generally less competent than citizens of other countries we can only assume that this is a function of formal and experiential training a and education. Bearing this in mind it will not be so surprising to find that ships with senior officers trained and educated in countries with lengthy histories of well-regulated maritime training and education colleges are in charge of ships with the highest ratings.
Neither should it be surprising that senior officers from relatively impoverished countries with more recent maritime histories are generally in charge of ships with lower ratings."
One master of a modern, large container ship owned and flagged in Hong Kong told Professor Lane "There is no competence. I am probably defending what shipowners have done and how they have changed to employing idiots because I have to put with them because, at the bottom line, if I don't, my mortgage doesn't get paid. So I have to make the best of a bad deal really and I can only do that by training them myself."
Indeed the most worrying conclusion Professor Lane drew from his research was that it lends further weight to the view that the maritime industry is firmly heading for a skilled manpower crisis.
"Senior officers from North and West Europe who in this study significantly contribute to the best run ships cannot be replaced by indigenous nationals once they retire. While we may be confident that equally competent senior officers from other world regions will be financially induced to replace them, this can only be at the expense of a general lowering of global standards of competence."
Professor Lane graduated with a first class honours degree in Social Science from Liverpool University in 1968. He was eight years at sea after leaving the Warwash School of Navigation in 1955. He has held posts with MNAOA and T&GWU. In 1993 he held the prestigious Hallsworth Senior Research Fellowship in Political Economy at the University of Manchester. Professor Lane is well known social and economic historian who has published widely. His better known books are Strike at Pilkintons, the Merchant Seamen's War and Liverpool, City of the Sea.
by Linda Gale
Unions have embarked upon increasingly sophisticated uses of Internet and email technology for a range of purposes - communication, solidarity campaigns, providing resources to members and the public, recruitment and organising. Australian unions, with a comparatively high technological base, have been in at the cutting edge.
As well as Workers Online, examples of the effective use of on-line communication by the Australian trade union movement include the development of web sites and email lists in support of the MUA during the Patrick dispute, the use of union web sites to post election campaign materials during the 1998 Federal Election, and the development of resources for schools about unions and work, hosted by the ACTU and some union web sites.
Australian unions are steadily expanding our use of web and email technology, although the range of uses and the extent to which we can keep sites updated and relevant varies. Increasingly, our members are gaining work and/or home-based Internet access, and there is a real challenge facing us to maintain a credible and effective profile for unions in this new medium.
Internationally, unions have come together in several major conferences to pool resources, expertise, ideas and enthusiasms (as well as to share problems and their potential solutions) in relation to the use of Internet and email technology for the trade union movement. Conferences have been held in Europe, Korea and the USA over the past 12 months. Unfortunately, the cost and time implications of attendance at such conferences has meant that few Australian unionists have had the opportunity to participate.
Now a group of Australian Unions have decided it's time to hold a conference on unions and the internet at this end of the globe. Unions Online - A conference on unions and information technology for the Australasian region will be held in Melbourne on November 15-17, 1999.
It is open to all unions in Australasia and the South Pacific region, and will provide a cost-effective opportunity for unions in this region to focus on our own use of Internet technology, and to improve our cooperation both in the form of solidarity campaigns and through sharing of ideas and resources.
Purpose of the Conference
The basic objectives of the conference are:
I. sharing ideas/experiences - learning from other unions and from international experience about what has been/can be done
II. building inter-union cooperation and solidarity
III. discussing political issues surrounding web and email use - can it be a democratising technology - access issues - political control over the 'line' (especially when open forums are used) - resource/staffing issues for the union movement - the role of 'webmasters' - privacy and security issues - monopolistic practices of software giants - potential for inter-union pooling of resources/effort - membership training - etc.
IV. technical skills development - both basic and higher level training sessions, running parallel to the conference program
Sponsor Unions
At the time of writing this report, the conference has received sponsorship from the AEU, FSU, CFMEU, IEU, LHMU, and AMWU. More unions are expected to formally endorse sponsorship over coming weeks.
For more information: A final conference program and registration details should be available soon. In the meantime, if you would like to be put on the mailing list for further information, just email Linda Gale at the AEU on mailto:lindag@edunions.labor.net.au
I love that ad asking who our first Prime Minister was. I especially like the girl who trills "I don't know". There's something very attractive about a good trill. Maybe that's why Scottish accents seem interesting and French ones captivating.
But it doesn't really matter what accent you admit your lack of knowledge in. The fact remains that the majority of Australian people have no idea who our first PM was. Good.
Think about it. 50 years from now, when Australians are asked who our leader was at the beginning of the twenty first century, we'll have no idea. John Howard will have oozed into the swamp of historical mediocrity.
Howard's legacy will be like Barton's - ignorance. That's because, like Barton, there will be nothing memorable about Howard's reign. Ordinary people remember their leaders, if at all, for their attempts to better their lives.
What is John Howard giving us? A jobless recovery. The destruction of a real republic. The failure to apologise to aborigines. A preamble that through the use of the word "mateship" celebrates the physical closeness and bonding of virile males because of the lack in the last century of females in the Outback. The implementation of "a new tax system" that is so modern it has its philosophical roots in the 1930s. Such is his greatness.
The philosophy underlying the Barton ad is that history is about who, not why. Our rulers don't want us to actually think about history. They just want us to know about some of their hero figures. Of course their champions are always establishment figures.
Isn't it interesting that there's no explanation of Barton himself, or how it was he became PM.
For a country steeped in alcohol Barton sets a good example. Our first Prime Minister was known to his enemies as Toss-Pot Barton. According to Manning Clark, Barton often began the day with rum and milk, as that, he said, kept a man rosy and genial. For afternoon tea he preferred whisky and water to the beverage the ladies pestered him to drink. All his adult life he believed in what he called `a steady irrigation of the alimentary canal with spirits and soda'.
While some politicians today might still practise the art of intemperance, none of them would dare espouse it. Imagine the present Prime Minister having a quick belt for brekkie to start him on his way. Come to think of it, maybe we would be better governed if he followed Barton's drinking habits.
So how did Barton become our first PM? Barton, because of his leadership of the Federation movement and his liberal centrist politics was the natural choice among the men and women of property to manage the country. They knew the profit system would be safe for them in his hands.
Yet no-one today knows him. Toby Toss-Pot has disappeared from our history.
Why? Everywhere there is apathy. Most people don't give a hoot about politics. The Republic debate is boring. People don't care who our present Prime Minister is, let alone who the first Prime Minister, long dead, was.
Apathy is not a recent development. In the run up to Federation the maximum turn out in the vote was 46 per cent.
46 per cent! Federation was important for the more intelligent sections of the economic elite. But for ordinary working people, battling to survive each day, it made little difference what particular form capitalist rule took. So they didn't bother to vote.
The bourgeoisie of today want to remind us of Barton's rule as part of their attempts to create or reinforce the myth of a united nation. But class differences are irreconcilable, and although workers may not engage in industrial struggle every day, they express these differences in a variety of ways.
They have no idea about Barton. Or Howard, really. One hundred years ago, federation was a yarn for working people. Today the republic is a yarn.
Alienation from the process of rule, and the daily struggle to stay afloat, mean that most ordinary Australians leave it to others to govern on their behalf. They are not part of the system that rules them.
Working people are doubly alienated. They are alienated from what they produce and they are alienated from the way they are governed. Political alienation protects and reinforces economic alienation. We live in an essentially undemocratic, exploitative society.
It was true too in the run up to Federation. Federation was a union designed to contain democracy rather than spread it. The whole process was about furthering the profit system and protecting those who lived off the labour of others.
It is not surprising then that the majority of working people were not inspired by Federation. They had no real say in the system Federation set up. So they had no interest in it.
Alienation is one of the defining characteristics of capitalist society. It's why people don't care about Barton. It's why the ARM's Republic of the rich has failed to capture the public imagination. And it's why, in a generation, John Howard will be a richly deserved obscurity.
The union, which is based in the mining town of Zonguldak, was in the middle of its three-day Congress. Semsi Denizer was murdered a few hours after addressing the opening day's session. He was shot six times in the head. Police arrested a man immediately afterwards.
Denizer was also General Secretary of the Turkish labour confederation Türk-Is. Recently, he had been leading a broadly based campaign against government proposals to raise the age of retirement in Turkey. This plan, strongly opposed by Turkish workers, is part of the government's response to demands by the International Monetary Fund for tougher austerity measures.
The motives for last Friday's shooting are unclear. A Türk-Is spokesman told ICEM UPDATE this morning that the unions were insisting on a full police investigation, and would reserve further comment until all the facts are known.
Semsi Denizer will best be remembered for leading 50,000 striking miners in an epic protest march from Zonguldak to Ankara in 1991. This dramatic demonstration helped to prevent mine closures in the region and to improve pay and conditions.
Semsi Denizer was on the Executive Committee of the 20-million-strong International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers' Unions (ICEM), to which Genel Maden-Is is affiliated. The ICEM has expressed its profound condolences to his family and his union. In a tribute, the ICEM described Semsi Denizer's death as "a great blow to the Turkish miners whom he led to victory in 1991 and to the international trade union movement as a whole."
Get the latest international labour news, every day athttp://www.labourstart.org
Labour Review,14 August 1999
Non-Standard Workers
What Impact has the Howard Government had on Wages and Hours of Work?
Non-Union Agreements
Pattern Bargaining: National v Site negotiations
Training
Federal Government Undermines Maternity Leave
Family Preferences, Child Care and Working Hours
Women's Earnings down to 66%
Unfair Dismissal for Contracts
Non-Standard Workers
Two recent conferences, one hosted by ACIRRT and the other by the Australian Industry Group, highlighted outsourcing, labour hire, teleworking, casualisation and dependent contractors, all under the umbrella of "non-standard" work.
Figures illustrating the changed workplace include
· 27% of the Australian workforce employed on a casual basis by 1998, and full time casual work expanding rapidly
· there are 1,002 labour hire companies operating in Australia
· 30 to 35% of employees had their wages regulated by individual contract in 1996.
The question of what is a genuine casual was discussed especially in the light of the full bench of the Federal Commission's decision in AMACSU v Auscript. The AIRC indicated that just because an employer calls someone a casual doesn't mean the commission will accept that. Rather they will look at the actual circumstances and if there is "an ongoing employment relationship" will be crucial to any decision.
Similarly with the issue of whether someone is an independent contractor or an employee. If a working relationship exists which is that of employer and employee, the parties cannot alter this by labelling themselves differently.
Labour hire and the legal implications of outsourcing was a big issue, with a focus on the increasingly common practice of transferring staff to a separate labour hire company and hiring back employees.
(Australian Enterprise Bargaining Update; newsletter 27, 25 June 1999)
What Impact has the Howard Government had on Wages and Hours of Work?
Howard and Reith claimed that no workers would be worse off under their industrial relations legislation. John Buchanan, Ron Callus and Chris Briggs make a preliminary assessment of that claim after two years of the Workplace Relations Act's operation.
Aggregate data would seem to bear out that claim. Looking more closely at disaggregated data on the four major types of wage determination (awards, collective agreements, individual contracts and contractors) shows that the phrase Barry Hughes used back in 1973 - the wages of the strong and the weak - captures today's realities.
In many ways the trends are part of the legacy of the ALP government's Industrial relations Reform Act 1993 with the Coaltion's legislation extending its ideas with the twist of actively seeking to demolish the power of unions altogether.
Workers relying on awards for increases depend on the safety net and in most industries the gap between the weak and the strong is growing.
The rise of self employed contractors has been a feature of the 1990s and due to the dependency of the contractors on certain employers they are also in a weak bargaining position.
The disappearing middle and the rise of the working poor has been a trend emphasised increasingly in recent years. NATSEM and researchers such as Bob Gregory have shown the importance of welfare transfer payments helping those at the bottom survive. With the cutbacks in social security and Third Way advocates such as Mark Latham (and now Noel Pearson) promoting self help and individual responsibility questions of equity and social justice seem to be bypassing the Coalition and New Labor. It is more important than ever that unions survive the onslaught and struggle to maintain a just and equitable society.
(Journal of Australian Political Economy; no. 43, June 1999)
Non-Union Agreements
Non-union collective agreements under s170LK of the Workplace Relations Act 1996 currently cover approximately 133,000 workers under 1200 such agreements registered with the AIRC. Mark Patterson from the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) claims 20% of all agreements have been made under this section of the Act. Unions are not necessarily excluded from the process but the ACCI and the federal government would of course prefer it that way. The Australian Guarantee Corporation and the Nike agreement are discussed here. The commission has made rulings in the Sebel Town House case and the above cases that limit the ability of unions to intervene.
(Australian Enterprise Bargaining Update; newsletter 27A, 2 August 1999)
Pattern Bargaining: National v Site negotiations
Orica, Hawker De Havilland, Pioneer and Shell are companies that have preferred to conduct centralised national bargaining, despite the Workplace relations Act's focus on enterprise or individual bargaining. Unions prefer this to ensure uniform outcomes. Carl Phillips from the AWU discusses the system here using Orica, Pivot Ltd and Email as examples.
(Australian Enterprise Bargaining Update; newsletter 27A, 2 August 1999)
Training
Betty Arsovska from ACIRRT presents a profile, based on ACIRRTs enterprise agreements database, of the way training clauses have been used in enterprise agreements. She looks at the frequency of training clauses and variation over a number of years of agreements, use by state and use by industry. Sample clauses in the airline industry and lighting production agreement are presented in full.
(Australian Enterprise Bargaining Update; newsletter 27A, 2 August 1999)
Federal Government Undermines Maternity Leave
Paid maternity has been stripped from employees of the corporatised Employment National (what's left of the CES) and workers at the Australian Government Solicitor face similar action. Entitlements were not transmitted when employees had to move to a new award in the corporatised Employment National. The recent decision by the Federal Court on entitlements of employees in the corporatised Victorian Health services would appear to undermine the federal government's approach.
At the same time, the Work and Family Unit of the Dept of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business has released Work and Family State of Play 1998 report extolling the virtues of companies who adopt family friendly practices.
Contrast this with the strong commitment of the NSW Government to strengthen family friendly policy, legislation and practice in NSW.
The private sector also has in some high profile instances (NRMA, Merrill Lynch, Westpac for example) been acting as a pacesetter in maternity and family friendly practices
(Discrimination Alert; issue 92, 3rd August 1999; Equal Opportunity Update; newsletter 105, 28 July 1999)
Family Preferences, Child Care and Working Hours
Julie Lee and Glenda Strachan challenge the rhetoric surrounding changes in work organisation which supposedly promote flexibility recognise work and family responsibilities. The evidence they gather points to the disparity between notions of flexibility held by employers and employees. Parental preferences with respect to child care and changes in hours arrangements (longer hours, greater spread of normal hours, increased weekend work) illustrate this disparity. If one party to such arrangements refuses to acknowledge and amend work practices then chances for change are slim. With a government encouraging such practices (as in NSW) improvements are possible. With a federal government giving more power to employers improvement is unlikely.
(Journal of Australian Political Economy; no. 43, June 1999)
Women's Earnings down to 66%
Sex Discrimination Commissioner Sue Halliday told the Women, Management and Industrial relations Conference that whilst women's average weekly earnings (full time) are 83.6% of men's the true picture (which includes over-award and overtime payments) showed that this figure drops to 79%. Given that many women were in part-time and casual jobs, the figure drops again to 66% when they are taken into account.
(Discrimination Alert; issue 92, 3rd August 1999)
Unfair Dismissal for Contracts
A case involving the termination of the contract of the Australian national table tennis coach has indicated that an employee on a fixed term contract is not necessarily barred from claiming unfair dismissal.
The Workplace Relations Act states that employees engaged under a contract for a particular period of time are excluded from unfair dismissal claims and this is what Table Tennis Australia relied upon in climing it was safe from such a claim in dismissing the coach. The AIRC found that the contract did not run for a specified time, despite the wording of the contract and its decision indicates that employers can't terminate an employee during the life of a contract and still insist that a contract is for a fixed term.
(Employee Relations Update; vol. 6, no. 128, 9th August 1999
by Michael Gadiel and Tanya Barber
Big sound, fast guitars, teenagers sweaty and screaming ....Daniel Johns the messiah of the new generation. Shyly at first he mumbles his thank yous to the audience, but as the night progresses and the music intensifies he soliloquises expansively to the audience and we start to see a modern day Jim Morison manifest himself onstage. With the looks of Kurt Cobain, the stage antics of AC DC and the Doors' prophetic style, there's no wonder Silverchair have captured the imagination of our youth.
Could it be that their success is the result of the right blend of sound from past rock legends? Is their style simply a carefully crafted combination sought by the marketers to generate a formula to appeal to the modern teenage ear - in the same vein as Hanson or Britney Spears. Or does Silverchair, in fact, pass the Spicegirl challenge? We say absolutely.
Silverchair qualify as an original act. Their steel city heritage, their extraordinary young age and their newfound political edge combined with the phenomenal voice of the lead singer...make them modern day working class heroes. Whilst on the snow fields in Jindabyne the middle class kids are jamming to Powderfinger the Working Class kids of Wollongong are moshing away to the thumping sounds of their class comrades...Silverchair.
Both bands have a unique philosophy, a strong class message and a new outlook on the world. Both talk of the failures of the ideas and the promises of prior generations, but the difference is that Powderfinger, although mournful, are more in harmony with the world. Their style and lyrics convey a melancholy acceptance of the human condition. In contrast, Silverchair vent the cynicism and anger of a generation with bleak prospects in a society which is oblivious to the plight of young working class people. They strike a chord in the minds of the youth who don't believe the solemn assurances of the politicians who 'are so sure', because the youth are unsure - acutely aware of truth, they certainly don't believe that our leaders will make it up to them in the year 200.
silverchair played at the Wollongong Entertainment Centre on Friday August 6
Unions
Simply the Best!
Technology
Unions Log In to Online Yap
History
Edmund Who?
International
Turkish Miners' Leader Murdered
Labour Review
What's New at the Organising Centre
Review
Working Class Boys
by Rodney Allen and Ian Hunt
The Problems
The new millennium confronts prosperous nations with two apparently intractable problems. One is persistently high unemployment, with high levels of long term unemployment, which threatens to create an underclass locked into welfare dependency, educational underachievement, despair and alienation. The second problem is that many of those who work suffer employment insecurity and attenuation. Increasing numbers of workers in Western nations are engaged in low-paid casual or part-time or temporary contract work, or are beset by economic insecurity. For many, this has meant that planning for the future is out of the question. Relentless restructurings and ruthless downsizings in both private and public sectors are driving more and more people into unemployment or marginal employment. While Western economies are growing quite strongly as the century draws to a close, those workers who are not yet unemployed are either actually insecure and relatively impoverished, or justifiably anxious.
Are things about to get better, at least in some countries, following the election of labour and social democratic governments in Britain, France and Germany? Will the emergence of 'compassionate conservatism' in Britain, Australia and elsewhere also make a difference? With both the social democratic 'third way' and 'compassionate' conservation, it seems that the same policies of marketisation, free trade, privatisation and welfare cutbacks will be pursued. What both offer is the prospect of some kind of social inclusion to counter the effects of these policies. But, in practice, will they offer anything more than smoke and mirrors? We have a proposal that might make a modest but real contribution to a solution for the new millennium to problems of unemployment, insecurity and social exclusion.
The Proposal
Our proposal is that we reintroduce chattel slavery - but this time on an optional basis - for all those facing the prospect of social exclusion. We should change the law to allow individuals the choice of contracting into lifelong slavery, as chattels of wealthy owners capable of providing them with secure sustenance for the rest of their lives in return for unpaid labour at the behest of their masters.
It is not envisaged that voluntary slavery would replace the familiar employment of wage labour by capitalists; it would, rather, be an addition to it, an option for those who fear for good reason that they will not be able to find secure paid employment. This new institution of slavery would be regulated so as to impose obligations of adequate slave maintenance on the owners. Slaves would have some basic rights - rights to food, lodging and medical care for themselves and any dependents. Slave-owners who were unable to meet their obligations would be able to sell their slaves in regulated slave markets to other reputable owners. Slave markets would be the mechanism guaranteeing slaves lifelong security, even if their owners become insolvent. Of course, after the initial free choice the new slavery would still be similar in crucial respects to older forms of the institution. Runaway slaves would be lawbreakers who could be hunted down and returned to their owners. Recalcitrant slaves could be summarily punished by their owners.
The Benefits.
The primary benefit of the reintroduction of slavery would be to solve, very largely, the problems of long-term unemployment and socially-excluded underclasses. At a stroke the cost of absorbing the unemployed into useful work would be cut to the bare minimum. At the moment one of the main barriers to full-employment is the high cost to employers of wage labour - costs that include paid holidays, sick leave, superannuation contributions, the expense of meeting occupational health and safety standards, and much more besides. Employers have moaned for years that they would employ more people if only the cost of doing so were not so high. Slaves would obviously be much cheaper than waged workers. They would be less expensive to maintain than dependent teenagers (for they would not need to be expensively educated) or a dependent spouse. So the super-rich could afford quite a few slaves, as servants and personal assistants, and as extra labour for use in their various business interests. Even the moderately well-off should be able to afford one or two. Manifestly, then, a new institution of voluntary slavery would be capable of soaking up the permanently unemployed and underemployed into useful service to the rich and well-off.
Voluntary slavery would not in many instances be radically dissimilar to the sort of life endured by housewives during the first half of the twentieth century, before the upsurge of feminism. Some housewives then complained that they too would have liked 'wives' of their own, if only it were possible. Voluntary slavery could revive the housewife in a more politically correct, non-sexist form. Since men and women alike could own slaves, rich women too could have male 'wives' (that is, domestic and sexual slaves). What was once only a feminist fantasy could become a reality. Men who preferred sexual slaves to partners with minds and resources of their own could purchase a slave rather than treat their spouses as such. Men and women would be equal under the slave system: they would be equally able to own slaves; and equally entitled to opt for slavery.
Voluntary slavery would also diminish demands on our public welfare systems, which are being wound back under pressures to cut expenditures and lower taxes. Just as many countries seek to partially privatise support for the elderly through superannuation schemes, so support for the unemployed and indigent could be partly privatised through slavery. Slaves would be securely maintained by the rich in return for unpaid service. By lessening the welfare drain on the public purse, slavery would help our economies become leaner and meaner. This would generate a virtuous circle, whereby slavery produces more rich people, who could in turn support more slaves.
As indicated earlier, the super-rich in our societies are withdrawing from public obligation. The reintroduction of slavery, however, could re-ignite a sense of noblesse oblige among the rich, inspiring personal support for the poor by way of slave-ownership. Here the principle of mutual obligation would be satisfied and be seen to be satisfied: slaves would labour at the whim of their masters (or mistresses); and masters (or mistresses) would provide for their slaves. Indeed the new slave system could be seen as a sort of privatised extension of the work-for-the-dole schemes currently fashionable in Australia and parts of America.
Another benefit of slavery would be increased security for wealth. Members of under-classes quite often and naturally resort to crime, especially crimes against property. Crime and vandalism worsen as our societies grow more unequal, as the poor are constantly provoked by the contrasting conspicuous consumption of the rich. Lurking behind rising crime rates is the even worse threat of social revolution. A system of voluntary slavery, however, would help safeguard wealth and property from both crime and revolution. It would turn a goodly proportion of the underclass itself into property, thereby placing many of the poor under the direct control of wealthy slave-owners, who would be armed with powers of summary punishment.
The unemployed poor now face social exclusion. Many could rejoin the social mainstream by opting for slavery. Slaves to the very rich might well enjoy a sumptuous lifestyle beyond the imagination of those now trapped at the bottom of our liberal capitalist societies. Unfortunately the institution of slavery at this point in history has a bad image, largely because at the time of abolition the dominant form was the brutal plantation slavery of the Americas and the Caribbean. In ancient Greece and Rome, however, slavery was not always oppressive and brutalising. Slaves to rich and powerful men often themselves had a great deal of derivative wealth and power; some even had slaves of their own. . For the most part the new slaves would participate more fully, if indirectly, in our consumer society than would the free poor.
Additional social benefits would accrue from the status of the slaves as property. Since slave-owners would own the bodies of their slaves at and beyond the point of death they would be able to sell on the body parts for use in transplant surgery and medical experimentation. A shortage of transplant organs would no longer be a problem. Owners would even be able to lease the bodies of slaves for medical experimentation while they were still alive (subject to broad safety conditions established by industry regulators). Advances in medical knowledge would consequently accelerate. Slave-owners could also own the DNA of their slaves, so that they could patent and make available on the market any advantageous genetic sequences they were discovered to possess (such as those that provide protection from serious diseases).
In summary, the reintroduction of slavery would have far-reaching benefits. It would benefit everyone - slaves, slave-owners, and other free citizens. It would not be a return to barbarism, as many might unreflectively think, but rather a higher stage in the development of liberal values and liberal societies. Voluntary slavery would actually enhance individual liberty by widening the range of freedom of choice to include the options of both slavery and slave-ownership.
Refutation of Objections
1. Slavery is immoral because it denies freedom to the slaves.
Sure, earlier forms of slavery were wrong for precisely this reason. Slavery was forced labour. Slaves were initially captured and coerced into slavery, and were retained in servitude by force and violence. Under the present proposal, however, the initial choice to become a slave is a free choice by an autonomous agent in a liberal society. A system of voluntary slavery would actually provide people with a new opportunity and hence a new freedom that they presently do not have. So, in relation to life choices, voluntary slavery does not deny autonomy to would-be slaves but rather respects and enlarges their freedom.
Of course, following the initial choice, slaves would be entirely unfree. While they would have some rights to adequate maintenance they would have no rights at all to self-determination. Slave contracts would be enforceable. Since slaves would be property they would be just as fully under the de jure control of their owners as, say, a working animal on a farm currently is. This is the crucial consideration that has swayed most of those who have actually thought about the possibility of voluntary slavery to rule it out of contention. How can a choice of total future unfreedom possibly be a legitimate freedom? How could it be justifiable for a society committed to the value of individual liberty to condone, enable and enforce such contracts?
That champion of individual liberty, John Stuart Mill, was certainly persuaded that voluntary slavery agreements shouldn't be allowed because the slaves would be abdicating their future freedom completely. In Mill's own words:
The reason for not interfering, unless for the sake of others, with a person's voluntary acts is consideration for his liberty. ... But by selling himself for a slave he abdicates his liberty; he forgoes any future use of it beyond that single act. ... The principle of freedom cannot require that he should be free not to be free
This argument runs counter to Mill's own insistence that, over matters that directly affect only himself or herself, an individual's sovereignty is absolute. The burden of his anti-slavery argument is that people shouldn't be allowed to do anything counterproductive to maximising of their future freedom. Following this principle, however, leads straight to conclusions that Mill himself would never have endorsed. For one thing, since death precludes any future exercise of freedom, voluntary euthanasia and suicide would have to be regarded as impermissible. Smoking, drinking, eating junk foods and indulging in risky sports all threaten to undercut future freedom, so that under a regime of freedom maximisation all these choices would have to be disallowed. The impetus of Mill's argument doesn't stop at the single case of slavery agreements; it carries us on towards compulsory diets, health police and other authoritarian paternalistic excesses that are a long way from respect for personal freedom and autonomy.
The crucial point, however, is this: if individual freedom is a basic right, and if personal autonomy is an intrinsic good for human beings, then people must be allowed the scope to make life-changing, risk-taking, freedom-restricting, life-damaging and even life-ruining decisions. This is part of what it means to be a free and autonomous agent. To interfere in an individual's choice to become a slave, therefore, would be to treat him in a manner inconsistent with respect for him as an autonomous agent. So the institution of voluntary slavery would not deny overall freedom to the slaves; on the contrary, it would respect their personal autonomy as expressed in their initial choices.
2. Since, under this proposal, slaves would mainly be recruited from the underclass, slavery contracts would not be agreements between free and equal partners. Many poor people would be more-or-less forced by their impoverished circumstances into slavery. Most decisions to enter slavery would fall so far short of ideal or full voluntariness as to be, essentially, nonvoluntary. They would be compelled by imposed social conditions, hence unfree and unfair.
In the real social world, hardly any of the agreements and bargains we accept as voluntary are made between parties in perfectly equal socio-economic positions. This is especially true, despite the efforts of unions, of agreements between wage-workers and large corporate employers. A decision to enter slavery need be no different in kind, at least on the score of unequal powers, from a decision to accept low-paid low-grade employment (or for that matter, to join the army). These latter choices may well be to a degree forced on our indigent agent by his social and economic circumstances, yet according to the prevailing liberal ethos they would still be regarded as free choices that carry all the moral implications of voluntariness. So why shouldn't the choice of slavery equally be regarded as voluntary?
Again in the real world quite a few women in marginal circumstances resort to prostitution as a way of obtaining some material security. Most of us wouldn't pretend that the initial situation of these women is a good or reasonable one, or that the prostitution option is so intrinsically attractive that they would have chosen it in better circumstances. Even so, those liberals who favour the legalisation of prostitution under present conditions must also believe that most of the choices women make to pursue this career option are sufficiently voluntary to be socially legitimated and respected. They must regard prostitution as an option that should be freely available to those women (and men too) who are trying, according to their own lights, to do the best they can in a bad situation. Why shouldn't the slavery option be similarly regarded?
Of course social marginalisation and exclusion are social evils. Ideally nobody should suffer them. We must remember, though, that it is we ourselves, the democratic majority in the liberal capitalist nations, who have determined that our societies should primarily pursue the values of economic liberalism and the free market. We have decided to trade away egalitarian justice for the opportunity, however tenuous, of becoming rich. The emphasis we have given to economic liberties and market competition means that quite large numbers of the poor and marginalised will keep haunting us for the foreseeable future. Shouldn't we, then, offer them the greatest possible range of opportunities to make, according to their own choices, informed by their own characters and viewpoints, the best they can of their difficult circumstances? Slavery may not be an ideal option for anyone, but it may still be a reasonable option for those locked into miserable and insecure situations. So voluntary slavery could be one element in a range of free opportunities that suit the structure and functioning of our market societies.
3. Voluntary slavery wouldn't work, no-one would opt for it, because no-one in their right mind would surrender entirely something as basic and important as individual freedom. It couldn't possibly be a rational choice for anyone. And of course anyone not in full possession of their faculties cannot be held to have autonomously chosen slavery.
Humanity, we know, encompasses a huge variety of actual human beings, each with her or his own unique set of characteristics, capacities and inclinations. Each person is also both influenced and constrained by a particular life history and a specific set of social circumstances. Within this enormous variety we can find not only people who thrive on the continual free exercise of their powers but also people who are uncomfortable with, even terrified by, the demands and exigencies of a fully self-determining life.
Aristotle once said that some people are natural slaves. He was, evidence suggests, quite right. The existence today of submissive housewives, uxorious husbands, volunteer military personnel, and religious cult members testifies to his wisdom. So the right sort of people to be slaves do exist amongst us. And the right sorts of circumstances for slavery - impoverishment and marginalisation - are enveloping more and more people. So, yes, it can reasonably be predicted that if slavery were to be made available as an option in our advanced but polarised capitalist societies, it would be eagerly taken up by quite large numbers of people, none of whom need be acting irrationally.
Karl Marx once said that the future contains only two possibilities - socialism or barbarism. If he was right, then we have chosen free-market barbarism as the fundamental structure of our societies. Within this structure we can only realistically hope as a society to do the best for people that suffer dehumanised conditions. A policy of re-instituting slavery would be one way of making the best we can out of bad (for some) circumstances.
4. Slave-owners would have unlimited power over their slaves. Such enormous power would inevitably lead to abuse. Slaves would suffer cruelty and maltreatment, and have no recourse or protection against abuse.
Slavery has sometimes been defined, in moral terms, as a relation in which slaves have no rights at all while their owners enjoy the right to do whatever they like to their slaves. Within that structure slaves would be mere instruments, having no more moral or legal status than your television set or electric frying pan. Under the present proposal, however, this would not be the case. Slaves would have rights against their owners, rights to adequate and secure maintenance, which would be legally enforceable. Within this structure, slaves should be just as well protected from abuse by their owners as, say, very young children are currently protected by the state from abuse by their parents. The new slaves, it is envisaged, would have a legal status somewhere between that of domestic animals and very young children, and very akin to that of prisoners of the state.
However, if we in the general community came to regard sole reliance on the state for the protection of slaves' rights as somewhat inadequate, we could set up non-government humanitarian organisations to monitor and reinforce the performance of this task. In Australia, for instance, in addition to such worthy organisations as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, we could found the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Slaves. What more could slaves ask for (if they are allowed to ask for anything)?
5. Slavery would morally corrupt the slave-owners. They would not be able to confine the attitudes appropriate to owned objects just to their slaves. They would develop a tendency to treat other free citizens as objects too, rather than as autonomous subjects worthy of equal respect.
Under the present proposal, slavery would involve only a fairly small sector in the mainly capitalist economies of generally liberal democratic societies. Most people would not be either slaves or slave-owners. The numbers of slaves, though substantial, would probably not exceed those of present-day welfare recipients. So the social relationships of the slave-owners would be mostly with other free citizens. Their basic social experience would be of a market economy, democratic political institutions and a liberal legal framework. So there is no reason to expect them to be morally any worse than members of the middle and upper classes are today. Indeed we could reasonably expect the new Master/Slave relationships to be more humanised than brutalised, because of the overwhelmingly liberal humanist socialisation of the new slave-owners. Far from slavery corrupting the slave-owners, the overarching liberal setting for the new form of slavery would influence the owners to be, if anything, excessively considerate to their slaves.
***
So there it is, then, the proposal of voluntary enslavement as a way of uplifting the underclass and providing opportunities for those on the border of social exclusion. History, we know, never repeats itself. We can't re-create the past, nor should we try to, but we would be unwise not to try to adapt the good features of old institutions to new situations and problems while at the same time transforming their bad features. This is precisely what the proposal of voluntary slavery does.
Those who labour in policy think-tanks have often been told to 'think the unthinkable' in attempting to devise solutions to current social problems. Slavery certainly counts as unthinkable at the moment, but it has been ruled out of contention by moral theorists and philosophers on the rather simplistic ground that it is, in principle, a bad thing. So is killing. However, just as most of us believe that we can have just wars, so too we could have justified enslavement, if there is no better alternative on offer.
The scale of welfare dependency and the unaffordability of state welfare are major difficulties currently facing our liberal capitalist societies. The welfare state is not working; it cannot provide sufficient welfare and, furthermore, as most mainstream analysts now believe, it has morally pernicious effects on the poor. Leaving people hanging around in idleness at taxpayers' expense is now seen as a sort of cruelty masquerading as beneficence. The institution of voluntary slavery would be a huge help in stemming the tide of taxpayer-funded welfare payments, and would provide work for those now mired in self-destructive idleness. Slavery would work; and so would the slaves.
by Pete Warrington
January 1933 was a time when the oppressed, the downtrodden, and the losers stood up. Fought back. Took what historically had been theirs. They developed new tactics, which were not acceptable to everyone. They found a shrewd, unprincipled, leader. He pulled together a team of ruthless henchmen, and they set out to right past wrongs, to reclaim the glory of their once great empire.
Meanwhile, in Germany, nobody knew anything about Bodyline, or "leg theory" as the polite denizens of the press termed it. They had their own problems. A certain spinner named Hitler was clamouring for selection, but he wanted to captain the team, open the batting and the bowling, and pick the team as well. Chief selector Von Hindenburg wrung his hands and stalled for time.
Yes, it was the worst of times, it was the worst of times, we were getting a flogging in the cricket and the tennis, the Depression was just bottoming out, the Fascists were on the march in Europe, Churchill moaned about the Naval Estimates whilst America inspected its navel. And Phar Lap was dead.
But the Herald's editor still managed to put on a brave face on New Years Day, exhorting readers to look to dare to hope in 1933. Notions of Empire dominated: "The New Year opens on a note of confidence, in Britain, Australia and South Africa, at least..."
Over in the Soviet Union, at one minute past midnight, Stalin's second 5-Year Plan kicked into action. Mrs Stachanov would have already have had the kettle on the boil, rousing her vigilant husband from his brief nap. Maybe he, like many in the Outback, dreamed of the Bourke-Darwin railway, slated to open up vast tracts of country for cotton and other crops. Proving that Australia has had more than one fine cotton fiasco.
Vishinsky would have us believe that this was the period Trotsky spent in Norway, plotting the assassinations of Lenin, Kirov, Stalin, Kennedy, Mrs Gandhi, Lord Lucan, Lennon and god knows who else. Somehow he found the time to publish his seminal History of the Russian Revolution on January 9.
But these weighty issues were not uppermost in the minds of the Herald readers of the time. It was time for David Jones' Clearance Sale. No manipulative price jigging here, DJ's was open enough to admit the stock was "the mistakes of 1932".
The first cricket Test had been played in Sydney in December, with McCabe's Kim Hughes-like 187 not out unable to stop Jardine's merry men taking a 1-0 lead. Strangely, in the lead-up to the 2nd Test in Melbourne, there was little talk of Bodyline and lots of the so-called player-writer sanction. The Australian Board of Control invoked this law to stop players from writing or broadcasting on the game. Bradman seriously considered standing down from the team. He played, and we latter-day readers lament the decline of this noble statute.
Racing was booming, there being no shortage of punters. Or meetings. Sydney was a city of racetracks... Randwick on the Saturday, Rosebery on Tuesdays, Kensington on Wednesdays and Moorefields the next Saturday. The latter three are now housing estates and a school, but don't expect the anti-golf lobby to care.
Tennis was huge as well. Australia and the USA WERE the Davis Cup, they WERE tennis, so the Yanks sent a team out here to play a series of tests. Our boys included the legends Harry Hopman, Adrian Quist and Jack Crawford. They flogged us.
Back to the cricket. The Australian team was a beauty - the courageous Bill Woodfull to open and captain; Gentleman Jack Fingleton; lefty Leo O'Brien; a chap named Bradman; that man McCabe; Victor Richardson; Bertie Oldfield; genius spinner Clarrie Grimmett; Teddie 10-for Wall; the one and only Tiger Bill O'Reilly; and the 50 year old Dainty Ironmonger. The Poms weren't hopeless either - the barnacle Sutcliffe opened with Wyatt, Pataudi and Leyland followed, the incomparable Wally Hammond came next, Jardine, the keeper Ames, and that feared bowling line-up of Allen, Larwood, Voce and Bowes bristled with venom. And much skill.
Australia batted first and made a measly 228, Fingleton contributing a vital 83. England replied with a meagre 161, O'Reilly and Wall wrecking the innings with 4 wickets each. This was what the English readers wanted to know about, not that storm in a teacup that was Bodyline; why, the Herald bemoaned, one local newspaper had even thought it necessary to interview Bowes' mother. That's Pat Welsh out of a job for one.
Let's leave the cricket for a minute and check on the English soccer scores. Results of matches played overnight in Division 1... Arsenal 3, Birmingham 0; Aston Villa 3, Middlesboro 1; Blackburn 1, Chelsea 3; Blackpool 3, Sheffield Wednesday 4; Derby 5, Leeds 1; Everton 1, West Bromwich Albion 2. Enough. Everton, with the great Dixie Dean leading the way, could not follow up their championship win of the previous year, but they won the Cup in May 1933. Suffice it to say that Sunderland, Sheffield United and Wolves were in Division 1, and Southampton, West Ham, Spurs and Manchester U-Shited were all in Division 2. Great days for soccer.
Back to the cricket. Australia made 191 in their second dig, Bradman doing a Slater and slashing his way to 103 not out. England never looked likely and folded for 139, O'Reilly opening the bowling and taking 5.
This obscured some troublesome developments - Japanese fighting in Manchuria, the dissolution of the Dail in the Irish Free State, and Marlene Dietrich being sued by Paramount for breach of contract. Alas, there was no Alec Baldwin to ride in on his white charger with the 40,000 pounds.
The forces of darkness had not silenced Sydney's trams. Not yet. 200 new trams were ordered, some to run over the fantastic bridge that had been opened the year before. This was farsighted government indeed, even the abolition of the NSW Upper House was on the agenda. The birthrate was the lowest on record. Papers discussed the British Issue - what relationship Australia should have with the mother of all countries.
And proving once and for that things haven't changed, the Royal Alfred Hotel in Missenden Road Newtown was robbed at 2am, the loot including whiskey, gin and 20 pounds. I wonder if they are still waiting for the police?
A bunch of young men couldn't have cared. The Metropolitan Colts beat Combined Country, and a certain A. McGilvray proved the game is indeed not the same by opening both the batting and the bowling for the Colts. Walter Lindrum filled the halls in Britain and the sculling world waited to see if Booby Pearce would turn pro.
The purges began in Moscow. They started with the big fry. Two former tradesmen, Odrinsky and Ragozin, were sentenced to death for "posing as Antarctic explorers, in addition to playing many practical jokes at the expense of official vanity and credibility".
Calvin Coolidge was so shocked he died. No one could tell. Anarchists rioted in Catalonia. In Melbourne, the Tigers were still celebrating their win over Carlton in October's Grand Final. Heady days.
The French were worried. They could feel the throb of the re-arming Germans. Naval Minister M. Leygues commissioned the battlecruiser Dunquerque in response.
Then Australian hero aviator Bert Hinkler went missing somewhere between London and Sydney. They narrowed it down a bit in the afternoon edition - he was somewhere in northern Italy.
The World Economic Conference on Disarmament in Geneva focused on the future of the gold standard. Liquid gold caught the attention back home, too, as Tooths, Tooheys and Reschs united to take on the wowsers with the classic "drink beer regularly - it's good for you" campaign.
There were reports of funny happenings on the Southern Highlands. Scientists pondered Lake George's disappearing water. The next day, Gordon Bryant, possibly the future Cabinet Minister but then aged 12, of Windellame (near Goulburn), reported that he had killed an 8-foot brown snake, which had a head like an iguana and, four inches below its head, a protruding leg like a lizard. Nobody in Moscow was fooled, they knew the work of Odrinsky and Ragozin when they saw it.
The 3rd Test in Adelaide was THE Bodyline Test. 800 extra police attended, the crowd was awash with rumours that the Australian-born Gubby Allen had mutinied and refused to bowl Bodyline. Jardine responded by opening the batting and facing down the baying crowd. They made an honest 341, Wall taking another bag of 5. Then came one of the most memorable innings of all time. Jardine set an orthodox field and Fingleton was bowled for 1. Woodfull stood up to the thunderbolts from Larwood but was struck a brutal blow above the heart. Jardine then had the presence of mind to order a Bodyline field for the very next ball, leaving a distressed Woodfull facing 6 short-legs, two square legs and a mid-wicket. The crowd went wild and threatened to rip Jardine in half.
Woodfull struggled on for 22, Bradman got 8, and at stumps Australia was in deep shit at 4-109. Woodfull was in the dressing room having his bruises attended to when MCC manager Plum Warner came to offer his sympathy. Woodfull issued the mother of all backhanders:
"I don't want to see you, Mr Warner. There are two teams out there. One is trying to play the game and the other is not. The game is too good to be spoilt. It is time some people got out of it."
Woodfull was ropable when his comments were widely reported the next day. It was hanging day, the sky was overcast and black. Cricket lay covered up, killed by a penknife in the back. Australia were vanquished for 222. The recalled Ponsford and his ample backside made a sterling 85. Oldfield, all 38 years of him, retired hurt for 41, his skull fractured by Larwood. In Larwood's defence, Oldfield slipped, the ball was too short to pull, and an orthodox field was set. But the damage was done. Australia went on to lose by 338 runs, the amazing Woodfull carrying his bat for 73 in the second dig, taking many deliveries on the chest rather than risk getting caught.
At the same time, the Nazis were complaining of a lack of funds. They had debts of 500,000 pounds, and bankers wouldn't touch them until Herr Hitler promised there would not be more elections. Chancellor Von Schleicher planned to include Nazis in his Ministry. Meanwhile, he re-introduced conscription. We kissed goodnight to the Treaty of Versailles. The French responded with a call for Austria to be designated permanently neutral.
None of this was given much attention back home. All news was of the battle of the cables...
"Bodyline bowling has assumed such proportions as to menace the best interests of the game, making protection of the body by the batsman the main consideration. This is causing intensely bitter feeling between the players, as well as injury. In our opinion it is unsportsmanlike. Unless stopped at once it likely to upset the friendly relations existing between Australia and England."
Thus spoke the Australian Board of Control to the men of the MCC. Many pressmen thought the wording tactless, and that the touring English hierarchy should have been given the chance to view a draft first. The MCC replied in spades five days later:
"We... deplore your cable. We deprecate your opinion that there has been unsportsmanlike play. We have fullest confidence in captain, team and managers... We have no evidence that our confidence has been misplaced... If the Australian Board of Control wishes to propose a new law or rule, it shall receive our careful consideration in due course..."
A more cutting rejoinder was offered by the "inventor" of Bodyline, Fred Root, who advised the Australians to learn how to play this new form of bowling, or stick to playing with tennis balls. In other words, "get Rooted!"
Proving that politics and sport have always been a potent cocktail, the Board agreed to withdraw the word "unsportsmanlike", allegedly because the Australian Government was concerned that Britain would not renew loans necessary to kickstart the economy.
On January 19 the Herald ran a story on the proposed Bondi Park Amusement Scheme, which was subject to a government inquiry. The Scheme included a cataract gorge, waterfalls, a magic cave and an aquarium. No beach volleyball stadium, no underground railway, but enough for the good people of Bondi to whinge about.
Other news that day included the escalation of the Sino-Japanese conflagration; the search for Hinkler; Gandhi's continued incarceration as thousands rioted in Calcutta; the Conference on World Economic Disarmament; and Maurice Chevalier's divorce.
But the Bodyline story continued to dominate the pages. Eddie Gilbert, the fastest bowler in Australia, and, coincidentally, an Aborigine and, allegedly, a chucker, warned the Poms that he too would bowl Bodyline when Queensland played them in early February. Given that Bradman rated Gilbert the fastest bowler he ever faced, this was no idle threat.
The 21st dawned to the news that a new expedition had set out for Mount Everest. The British Navy had its own Everest to climb. The Report of the Estimates found that the Powers' relative sea strengths had altered greatly to the disadvantage of Britain. Everton showed that the balance of power had tipped their way, by disposing of Sunderland 6-2. And as the pre-conditions for the next war moved inexorably into place, diplomats were pre-occupied with finding an equitable solution to the debts from the last one.
It won't surprise readers to know that Sydney had a water crisis. Sir Thomas Henley criticised the Water Board's "wild-cat engineering", suggesting Warragamba was little more than a huge septic tank, into which drained all the sewage and stormwater from the Blue Mountains. As Marx said, the first time is tragedy, the second time farce.
Whilst readers digested tha