The Community and Public Sector Union has asked workers to authorise them as agents for a two-week long collective AWA, to enable them to seek a protected bargaining period that could allow them to take industrial action over the Christmas-New Years period.
This is because the current Telstra agreement contains a 'no extra claims' clause prohibiting action in support of the claim.
While the CPSU has been seeking millennium pay rise talks, Telstra management has refused to discuss specific details - although there is talk within the organisation of a $500 New years Eve bonus in some sections.
Workers are seeking:
- a $40 per hour frequent attendance for those required to attend work for more than three days between Christmas to New Years Eve
- a $100 per hour bonus for anyone required to work any time between New Years Eve and January 2 - in addition to any other penalties.
- a flat on call allowance of $700.
"This is a bit of a departure from the normal practise in Telstra where standard AWAs have been offered to staff on a take it or leave it basis," CPSU telecommunications secretary Stephen Jones concedes. "Its a bit like putting the shoe on the other foot."
"We expect that when Telstra realises we are serious about the AWA strategy they will come to the negotiating table."
The members of the Community and Public Sector Union have been outraged by management inferences that they are overpaid as negotiations for a new enterprise agreement heat up.
While affirming their commitment to improving customer service, the workers say conditions in the Telstra call centres have deteriorated in the past 12 months.
"We have been harassed about our sick leave, and assigned schedules that have been difficult, if not impossible to work," they say in an open letter to Telstra management.
"We have had colleagues who have had to resign from their jobs because centre management have been unwilling to be flexible with our working hours and allow us to balance our work and family commitments.
"We have seen colleagues come into work when they are sick just so they don't get penalised in their performance assessment or targeted as poor performers."
And they say that Telstra's record profits, 20 per cent pay increases for Telstra senior staff and a 50 per cent rise in directors' fees have made the hard line on their own pay and conditions even harder to swallow.
The open letter by staff was sent after Telstra management mailed 12,000 personalised letters to staff home addresses.
CPSU Stephen Jones says Telstra has placed cost-cutting measures including a lower pay classification for new call centre staff as a condition on them receiving a four per cent pay rise negotiated under the current enterprise agreement.
The Labor Council has recommended that the Building Trades Group of Unions impose the green bans on the McDonalds proposed to be built on Grand Drive between Moore Park and Centennial Park.
The Centennial Park Residents Association says the development is an "inappropriate commercial use of public parkland" in an area of national significance.
"It will degrade Moore Park's heritage, and work against the park's important function of providing active and passive recreation," they say.
The McDonalds franchise was approved in a secret deal by the former Coalition Government after writs had been issued for the 1995 election and the government was in caretaker mode.
Since then, Centennial Park trust has been granted $7.9 million in Federation fund money to transform Grand Drive into its 1880s vision of a grand boulevard at the birthplace of Federation. Residents say a McDonalds should not be part of this vision.
South Sydney Council is opposing the McDonalds development and the matter is now before the Land and Environment Court.
Labor Council secretary Michael Costa says it's appropriate that unions flagged their opposition to this "silly proposal".
"You would think that in this city there are enough McDonalds outlets - and if there isn't, public parkland is not the place for another one," Costa says.
If the green ban is approved, the developers will have to meet with residents and negotiate in good faith before any work will go ahead.
"This is not anti-McDonalds," Costa says, "but surely they can move their outlet further down Anzac Parade."
The AFL-CIO made the announcement at its biennial conference in Los Angeles this week.
The American union's peak body says the deal will offer low-cost Internet service and discounted American-made computers for union families.
A range of union-friendly products also will be available to working families through an e-commerce shopping link, and the federation is considering how to add an education component that will allow union members to tap into a variety of training.
"It will provide union members one main access point to the Internet--a personalised "portal" page tailored by the individual user to his or her own interests and featuring, for example, news stories, stock quotes, links, private chat areas and even perhaps a daily horoscope," the AFL-CIO says.
Social Change Online's Sean Kidney says the main difference between the AFL-CIO model and the ACTU plan is that US unions will retain their control of their portel, rather than giving it to a commercial interest.
"They recognise that the portel is what the game is all about and it is the primary channel of communication with members that need to be at the heart of union activity," Kidney says.
In contrast, the ACTU plan being developed by Bill Kelty would allow Virtual Communities to control the union portel, offering exclusive deals to commercial suppliers in a bid to maximise e-commerce profits.
Under the plan, users would have to log off and enter the net through a separate service provider in order to visit sites not endorsed by the web entrepreneurs.
Westpac Managing Director David Morgan has said that his bank's decision to close more branches and slash 3,000 jobs was all about reading itself to be a player should the Federal Government relax its four-pillar policy.
FSU national secretary Tony Beck says Mr. Morgan's comments are outrageous. "It seems that announcing 3,000 job losses is not enough for Westpac, they want the Federal Government to lift its ban on big bank mergers so they can cut even deeper.".
"Speculation about big bank mergers does nothing but harm to the community. Big bank mergers means hundreds more branch closures, up to 40,000 job losses, and even worse service for customer. The community doesn't want them and the Federal Government should categorically rule them out," said Mr. Beck.
Since Westpac took over Bank of Melbourne in 1997 it has closed over 100 branches and slashed more than 1,000 jobs in Victoria. By multiplying this effect by 20 to get some idea of the devastation if two major banks were to merge.
Social Charter Call
Following the announcement, the FSU has called on the Federal Government to work with consumer, industry and employee groups to develop a charter of social responsibility for Banks
"The banks hold a privileged position in our community and there are social responsibilities that come with that privilege. Westpac's decision to cut more branches and jobs adds to the overwhelming body of evidence that suggests the banks are incapable of managing these social responsibilities by themselves," Becak says.
"The Federal Government needs to take urgent action to establish a charter of social responsibility for the banks that sets out their obligations to their customers and staff. Something needs to be done to restore the balance between the interests bank executives and large shareholders and the interests of the community," said Mr. Beck.
FSU is writing to Prime Minister John Howard seeking a meeting to disucss ideas for a social charter.
Remember How Much The Banks Make?
Below are the 1998 profits (after tax) for the four major banks.
1. NAB $2.511 billion
2. Westpac $1.342 billion
3. CBA $1.251 billion
4. ANZ $1.175 billion
Analysts expect that Westpac will post a record profit this year of $1.43 billion. This is not a bank in crisis.
TWU state secretary Tony Sheldon has written to all state and federal Labor MPs asking them to help resist the Federal Government's assault on working people by signing up to a Union Parliamentary partnership.
Under the proposed partnership, MPs and unions would agree to the:
- training of Parliamentary staff in basic industrial relations and employee entitlements.
- the development of organising techniques
- the use of electoral offices to educate and assist local constituents with industrial relations issues.
- the use of electoral offices as a referral service to peak union bodies, participating unions, appropriate community groups and government departments.
Sheldon says the proposal is important in educating Labor representatives in Parliament about the changing priorities and approaches being used by trade unions as they go down the organising path.
Already 18 MPs have signed up to the protocol - although Sheldon says it will be more interesting to see who refuses to help the unions.
The implementation of the TWU plan will be discussed at the Labor Council's next Organising Committee meeting.
Advisory Council to Run Through ALP
Meanwhile, the Premier's new State Labour Advisory Committee will be established through the ALP's Administrative Committee, which will meet in two weeks time.
Labor Council secretary told Labor Council that SLAC, announced at the ALP State Conference will be chaired by the Premier with representatives of government, Labor Council and the Party.
Costa says he'll convene a meeting of union affiliates to discuss the best ways of representing union concerns on the new body.
Reith this week released a Discussion Paper calling for changes to provisions governing registration and administration of trade unions that will make it easier for employer-sponsored organisation to take on the guise of genuine trade unions.
It would also allow a single union member to apply for disamalgamation of a union and give non-financial members a vote in the ballot.
"This is obviously aimed at fracturing unions in order to weaken them," ACTU president Jennie George says.
And she says while unions support financial accountability for unions they should not be framed in a way that prevents unions operating effectively.
But George says the main significance of the paper is the timing of its release - to overshadow the long line of critics of Australians have seen through Reith's manipulative tactics many times before and will not be fooled again.
"Why isn't Mr Reith addressing the real issues that concern working people - job security, the growth of casual jobs,. work overload, long and unreasonable hours and unpaid overtime.
Sydney hearings later this month
Meanwhile, the NSW Labor Council is coordinating protest actions outside the Sydney Senate hearings into the Second Wave.
On Friday 22 October retired unionists will conduct a ceremonial handover of hard won conditions to student outside the hearing at the Gazebo Hotel, Elizabeth Bay at midday.
And women's groups will make their protect at the impact of the laws on female pay and conditions outside State Library at 11am on Tuesday October 26.
by Jason Gibson
GLAM in conjunction with Trades Hall and the Flight Attendants Association has placed ads in the gay and lesbian press to tell people that if the boss finds out you're queer, you could be in trouble.
They can sack you in the first 6 months of your job, if you're a casual or if you work for a company with fewer than 16 employees and you will have no appeal to the Industrial Relations Commission or the Equal Opportunity Commission and your workmates will be banned from taking industrial action to support you.
This is unfair and an outrage in a first world country such as Australia. It is already hard enough for organisers to get access into workplaces but this will make it almost impossible to get in and investigate acts of discrimination.
Furthermore the legislation will allow the boss to legally pay one worker less than other people doing exactly the same job; again allowing legal discrimination against gays and lesbians.
These so called 'reforms' will turn back the clock for all workers, but especially gays and lesbians and other groups traditionally discriminated against.
GLAM plans further actions to get the word out.
In the sort of public relations that made the banking industry famous, Opposition treasury spokesman Peter Denham says a future Coalition government would attack the "insatiable juggernaut" which should be tamed by an aggressive policy of forced redundancies.
The Member for Vaucluse, considered a rising star of the Liberals, also signalled a freeze on public sector wages, claiming public servants were overpaid.
One can only wonder what the comments, reported in the Sunday Telegraph, will do for public support for the Coalition, which is at its lowest ebbs since polling began.
With rural communities already revolting against the Carr government's comparatively measured contracting out policies, the policy position could also see the NSW Nationals further decimated in the rural NSW by country Labor.
In the article Denham says he realises the move is provocative but necessary - necessary for what he does not say . Perhaps his own leadership aspirations?
The company formerly known as 'the Big Australian" would sell offshoot BHP Engineering to a Canadian company, Hatch, including millions of dollars of employees accrued entitlements with no strings attached.
Under the deal Hatch would be allowed to use the employees' entitlements to finance its operations, despite calls from APESMA to place the employees' entitlements in a secure trust fund.
APESMA, who representing professionals employed in BHP Engineering, have called on BHP chair Don Argus to intervene and overturn the management's decision.
"BHP must guarantee the security of its employees' entitlements before any sale to hatch," APESMA senior industrial officer Catherine Bolger says.
"Hatch is relatively unknown in Australia - if they are unsuccessful and walk away from their Australian venture all members could lose all their entitlements.
Conservative estimates put the accrued entitlements at $19 million and then redundancy at anywhere up to $100 million if all 700 employees of BHP Engineering were thrown out of work.
"BHP has a moral obligation to secure the entitlements of its employees - but so far the attitude to staff have been dismissive and paternalistic," Bolger says.
Labor Council's safety watchdog Mary Yaager is developing standards for working in heat, an area of health and safety that is currently unregulated.
Yaags says that one employer offered their workers ice cubes to suck on when the in-door temperatures soured above 40 degrees Celsius.
This was the experience of Lilly Proctor, an LHMU organiser, who worked as a seamstress before joining the union - for an employer who has since shut down.
Nadia Mirabilio from the Shop Distributive And Allied Employees Association is also concerned about the temperatures that her members have to work in without adequate cooling systems or rest or breaks
And Trish Butrej from the New South Wales Nurses Association says it is also a concern for nurses, some of whom have fainted while showering patients after being over come by the heat.
Yaags says these are the sort of issues which will dealt with in the guidelines, that will be available soon on the Labor Councils' OHS site http://www.ohs net.au
Gusmao released the following statement after meeting with Australian union leaders this week.
"I commend the Australian union movement and its humanitarian aid agency APHEDA - Union Aid Abroad for your solidarity and support to our independence struggle and your ongoing commitment to supporting us in developing health, education, reconstruction and human rights programs.
Your expression of international solidarity towards our people is greatly appreciated. We look forward to your continued support and to working together to build a free East Timor.
We thank the people of Australia and the trade unionists who have supported our struggle.
I call on Australian organisations and people of good will to support the work of APHEDA - Union Aid Abroad for the advancement of the people of East Timor."
by Naomi Steer
The anecdote, which resulted in a complaint to Federal Sex Commissioner Susan Halliday was one of the battle stories recounted at this week's Annual Women in Trade Unions Dinner.
Ms Halliday gave a number of examples of recent complaints to the commission, including:
� a pregnant woman being asked by her supervisor when she intended to stop working and being told "it doesn't look very nice with you doing table service while you are pregnant"
� a boss who insisted that his female employees wear tight trousers, skimpy clothing, red lipstick and nail polish" because it looked sexy."
� repeated and numerous examples of male supervisors and male coworkers harassing women by sexual innuendo, crude sex references and unwelcome touching and sexual propositions.
While Halliday pointed out that men also face discrimination and harassment in the workplace, over 85 per cent of complaints lodged under the Act are made by women, the majority of which involve sexual harassment.
She urged the 150 women attending the dinner to encourage their unions to pursue more complaints through the Sex Discrimination Commission as a practical alternative to the industrial commissions.
And she urged better training for delegates to deal with discrimination matters in the workplace.
The recording took place in Sydney this week on the night before the ARIA awards, where You Am I manager Todd Wagstaff coordinated a conga line of talent.
With Cruel Sea as the house band, artists including Tim Rogers, Tim Freedman, Deb Conway, Mark Seymour and Josh Abrahams laid down the track.
It will now be distributed to radio stations and can be heard on live on the Channel V web-site.
Jennie's Call to Arms
Meanwhile, ACTU President Jennie George today called upon Australia's more than 2 million union members to campaign passionately in their workplaces and with their families and friends for a "Yes" vote in the referendum for a Republic on 6 November.
She says that statistics showed 74 per cent of Australian workplaces had union members, and 52 per cent had union delegates (1995 Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey).
"Union members are perfectly placed to campaign on the Republic. This could be the only chance we have in our lifetimes to decide on this important issue for Australia's future."
A personal message from Ms George to all union delegates is currently being distributed by unions.
Full details at the ACTU website
The knowledge of the development of the universe, the solar system, the evolution of life on this planet, the biosphere and the Noosphere including the laws governing the development of human society places the present political and economic class struggle in a proper context.
The conflict waged by the wage earners to obtain political power by Democratic means, transforming the ownership of production in a planned, organized and rational manner over a period of time coincides with the development of the Noosphere.
The Noosphere
"Noosphere, the sphere of the planet embraced by rational human activity."
According to Vernadsky, "with the emergence and development of human society the biosphere naturally turns into N., because mankind as it's masters the laws of nature, and develops technology, improves the means of production, increasingly transforms nature in line with its requirements."
The idealist ideology of the Capitalists which maintains that capitalism is the ultimate development of the organization of human society with the private ownership of production as the final base for all relationships clearly becomes null and void. To put it mildly such a viewpoint is totally ridiculous and not worthy of any serious consideration. Such views predominate through our present day society. Scientists would do well to apply their thinking in a materialist way to the laws governing society as they do to the laws of nature and matter.
"For it is the biosphere which determines the characteristics, velocity and direction of the evolutionary change of species that are comprised of it. As human society develops, a qualitatively new form of programming is coming into existence. It is planning."
The development at the present time is showing that genetic therapy is to become a reality. The correction of growth abnormalities which are caused by unfavourable hereditary change are on the medical agenda. This research will grow and have profound effects on human societies of the future. The result of this information will raise the stability of the hereditary basis of mankind.
'Noogeniseis implies the development not only of the biosphere and society but of every individual human being.
Ian G Ferguson
What is the difference between a football Grand Final and the Second Wave legislation? In the Grand Final both sides play to win.
Reith's plan to shackle the unions will have far more impact on people's lives, than the recent Grand Finals, even than the end of the Balmain Tigers, or possibly South Sydney as Rugby League teams.
But after the August union rallies, what next? The ACTU web site's main recommendation is to write to Democrat Senator Andrew Murray. It seems the logic of the ACTU's approach now, is to hope that the Democrats will make Reith's laws a little less evil.
This is like the underdog hoping for a draw in the Grand Final - but there can't be a draw. Reith will go to extra time until there�s a clear winner. We can't risk forfeiting Grand Final victory to Reith. And right now, it's very hard for us players and delegates out here, to see that the ACTU has a game plan to win.
We the players, the active union delegates, are the best ones to develop a plan to defeat the Government, with industrial action, pickets, further education. In this matter of life and death for the union movement we need a special conference of the union movement to debate and decide our campaign.
Janet Burstall
PSA member
mailto:[email protected]
Early this week the Senate will vote whether to allow the Howard Government to take the human out of human rights.
There is little time to act.
Under a Bill known in Canberra as HREOC II, the Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission (HREOC) will become known as the:
Equal Opportunities and Equal Responsibilities Commission (EOERC - a wretched sounding acronym which echoes Howard's wretched record on human rights issues).
More disturbing than the Orwellian name change, however, the government wants to replace the existing commissioners -- each of whom specialise in different fields such as sex, race, disability -- and replace them with a single commissioner for all areas of discrimination.
It is impossible for any one person to remain in control of, and have an in-depth knowledge of, all such areas of discrimination.
We fear the output from the commission will not be able to done to the same high standard. Important HREOC roles such as advocating reform and examining discriminatory legislation are likely to suffer.
Most dangerously, the Bill seeks to give the Attorney-General of the sitting government the power to intervene in a case and the power to veto a case. The government needs to be reminded about the separation of powers, particularly where it involves a judicial system (the courts).
RUMOUR has it the ALP is willing to vote with the Government to pass the
HREOC II Bill.
* URGENT PROTEST IS REQUIRED. *
TELL the pollies we DEMAND they keep the HUMAN in Human Rights.
Citizens, and most notably citizens in identifiable minorities have been fighting for equal rights all this century, but it is our successive governments which have not come to the table with their equal responsibility to seriously address the issues.
Here is a government which has refused to say sorry for human rights violations of the most serious kind.
Now it is spitting the concept of human rights back in the faces of all disadvantaged Australians.
Instead of real action on discrimination, Howard serves us trite, talkback-driven newspeak.
PLEASE URGENTLY CONTACT:
Senator the Honorable Nick Bolkus, Opposition Attorney-General spokesman, Ph: (02)6277 3388 Fax: (02)6277 3062. mailto:[email protected]
Senator the Honorable Brian Greig, Australian Democrats A-G spokesperson Ph: (02)6277 3338, Fax: (02)6277 5703 mailto:[email protected]
The Honorable Daryl Williams, Attorney General. (02) 6277 7300(Tel) (02) 6273 4102(Fax) mailto:[email protected]
Iain Clacher - mailto:[email protected]
I read with great interest Ray Hunt's article on tax reform. Unfortunately, the article was burdened by outdated rhetoric, and some wrong assumptions.
I draw your particular attention to some of the proposed "tax reforms" suggested in the article.
- US1 cent on every e-mail - easily collected via Internet Service Providers. US2 cents on each business e-mail.
Why would you ever want to tax communication. Also, once the GST is introduced, the subscriber will be double
taxed, with paying GST on the initial subscription, and then every time they send an email.
- one per cent of every gross futures trade / two percent over $US1 million - easily collected via the Futures Exchange's automated trading system.
- one per cent of every gross share trade / two percent for trades over $1 million -easily collected via the Stock Exchange's automated trading system.
Both these amount to the same as a stamp duty, which are set to be abolished.
- one per cent of every gross currency transaction / two per cent over $US1 million - easily collected via the Currency Exchange's automated trading system.
This should be dealt with by the GST. Also, a problem with thresholds, is if people were desperate to get around paying such a tax, they could e.g.
exchange currency in lots below the $1m threshold and get around it all together.
- one per cent of every credit card transaction - collected via banks. Two per cent on business credit cards.
This would reimpose stamp duty which are set to be abolished.
- two per cent carbon tax on all non-renewable fuels and energy - business and domestic - to fund global reforestation.
Why unduly tax something ie fuel exploration and mining - an industry that Australia is very efficient in?
- one US cent per Internet search - easily collected through search companies. Two US cents on business Internet searches.
Why tax information?
- Two per cent on every standard airline ticket / four per cent business class / six per cent first class.
Some airports already run a departure/arrival tax.
- Two and a half per cent business turnover tax - an idea floated at Hawke's 1984 Taxation summit. Apply to companies grossing more than $20 million per annum.
This is simply ridiculous.
Cheers
Roberto Colanzi
I'm working on a documentary looking at the history of the Green and Golden Bell Frog. This is the frog that lives in the brick pit at Homebush Bay.
The story will follow the frog's history from the time when they were common 30 years ago to now endangered and the efforts to re-establish habitat and re-introduce them to new locations around Sydney.
I'm keen to include workers from the brick pit who remember the frog and have anecdotes to tell. I would also be interested in any photos or footage of the brick pit when it was a going concern.
I understand that the union who looked after the workers was the Federal Brick, Tile and Pottery Union that is now part of the CFMEU. The division is now known as the Clay and Ceramics Division. I am trying to get in touch with Trevor Melksham who may also be able to help,
Lou Petho mailto:[email protected]
by Peter Lewis
You're president of one of the few unions who can boast close to 100 per cent union membership. What's your secret?
You'll find police associations around the world have these high levels, which reflect the professional nature of the membership. Police are committed to their union, without being radical. But that conservatism should never be taken as a weakness and I think that's been displayed in recent times, particularly NSW, over things like appeal rights and salaries and other types of issues, but by and large a conservative group.
It's also though a very discreet professional group. Where a lot of unions ran into difficulties through the amalgamation process, that was never really an option for the Police was it?
No, in fact in all the jurisdictions in Australia, with the exception of the Australian Federal Police, they are industry specific, so they only have sworn police officers. In the Australian Federal Police they cover the public servants working in its jurisdiction as well.
Even though you have got this strong membership base, I understand you are doing work with TUTA to embrace the organising approach to unions. Can you tell us a bit about what you are doing there?
At our last biennial conference we invited TUTA along to play a key role. We've seen a number of our fellow police associations, both in Australia and overseas, suffer significantly at the hands of oppressive governments, and certainly oppressive management in various police services. And whilst we have probably escaped that in NSW to a large extent, that's not to say in these days of economic rationalism that that's not going to happen in NSW as well. The only way, I believe, unions will effectively combat those types of regimes and ensure that their members' rights and interests and welfare are preserved, is by being organised. And that's exactly what we are doing. I think we also have a very clear obligation to those people who are elected as officials in the workplace to ensure that they've got the skills and resources to carry out their role.
So, how are you doing that? How are you moving to an organised approach?
What we have done is we have developed what we call our Branch Focus Project and we are running it in two pilot sites across the State; one in the Hunter area and one in what we call the Endeavour region, which is the inner-west area of Sydney. It involves training programs for branch officials, specifically developed for the Police. So it specifically looks at issues that are relevant to policing and issues that are relevant to officials or branch officials in the Police Association. Interestingly enough we have had a great deal of interest shown in our programmes from New Zealand and other jurisdictions throughout Australia who are looking at sending representatives along from their jurisdictions to try and pick up on what we are doing here in NSW.
And what are the big ticket items for Police at the moment in NSW?
Well, certainly the East Timor one is a very, very topical item, and as I said, I am in Canberra as we speak, looking at a whole range of issues on behalf of our members who will travel over there. We are trying to ensure that anyone that actually ends up going to Timor is not only catered for whilst they are in Timor, but certainly into the future. Those police officers that have come back in recent times from the first contingent, many of those police officers, and I must say perhaps army officers as well, will suffer significant trauma as a result of it. In fact, post traumatic distress from some of the horrific things that they have seen over there, and we are trying to ensure that our members are catered for, not only whilst they are there, but certainly into the future when they come back.
Two other key issues we are looking at is the impact of Fringe Benefit Tax legislation on police - particularly on rural police and police officers who have to take police vehicles home when on call. The other issue is some of the superannuation legislation that will the goalposts for police officers in coming years.
Your Association has done some interesting work with OH&S over the years. A few years ago after the Crescent Head shooting, you actually launched a prosecution against the Police Service under the OH&S Act. Where did that end up?
That matter is still in process. In fact, another one has been launched since that, and that is in relation to lead poisoning suffered by many of our weapons trainers in ranges throughout NSW. And we have launched a prosecution in that respect as well.
What would be the implications of those cases?
I think it will be interesting because we are saying that obviously the Police Service has a duty of care and obligation to protect our members, and perhaps on these occasions that duty of care has lapsed.
And so if the case got up it would basically change the ways that police administration has to operate?
I would think so, perhaps more so than police. I think it would probably change the whole attitude of employers right across the country.
Another area where unionists come into contact with police is on the picket line. You have negotiated a code of conduct for pickets with unionists, but do the other unions understand what those rights and responsibilities are?
Probably the union officials understand. From time to time perhaps some of the members don't quite thoroughly understand. But I think what you have to remember is the fact that those police officers that are actually there working on the picket lines are union members themselves. And of course, like most things, they've got their own view of the world and many of them are obviously very sympathetic to the plight of the people that are actually on the picket line.
If you look back to the MUA dispute, I believe that the Police Association, particularly in NSW, led the way in Australia in the way it let its members be utilised. We didn't become puppets for either the government, the unions, or the employer. We played what we believed was the appropriate role, and I think if you looked at the Waterfront Dispute in NSW, particularly the waterfront in Sydney, I don't think that anyone could argue that the police in that role and the Police Association's involvement, was a bit of a watershed, in the way those sort of issues should be handled in the future.
Have there been instances where police have actually had to stand up for that right of neutrality, where there has been the feeling that they are expected to go through hard on unionists and picketers?
Oh look, there's been many instances because obviously, the employer from time to time tries to encourage whoever might be in charge of the police at the picket line, to take a particular course of action that certainly would suit the employer. And on many occasion in fact, it's been our own officials at those sites that have intervened to ensure that equality is given to both sides of the argument. That not only the picketers are catered for, but of course the management as well, and I think we have been successful and I think the long running dispute in the Hunter Valley, at Rio Tinto, was probably another example of how well equipped we are to handle those sort of issues and certainly ensure that there is no negative criticism, particularly from those on the picket line.
In NSW the last few years has seen significant reform in the Police Service. What's your union's evaluation of the Carr Government and Police Minister Whelan in terms of Labor principles of government?
Look, I don't think that anyone could argue that there's been enormous gains for policing under the current government. - Enormous gains. And I think you've only got to look at issues such as salary, you've got to look at issues such as resources and in particular police numbers. When I talk about resources I am also talking about capsicum spray. I'm talking about extendable batons. I'm talking about the firearms and body armour hat we have. Upgrading of our workers' compensation benefits for police. A whole range of issues. And I think there's a long way to go.
We've received tremendous support from this Government, but that's not to say from time to time, we will have differing views and we will make those views very clearly known to the Government. But on all occasions to date, we've been able to finally negotiate outcomes that have been in the interests of both sides in win-win situations. But as I've said, don't take the conservative nature of police for weakness, because I think if you refer back to our experience in 96/97 salaries and appeal rights, I think we were as militant on those occasions as any union in NSW.
When you say your members are conservative, what are their attitudes to the law and order policies that you hear around election times?
Whenever we argue on issues of law and order, we always try to do it from a base of research. So we don't like to just use the rhetoric, we try to back what we say with appropriate research. And if you recall before the last election, the discussions - particularly in relation to police numbers - we supported our argument with a very, very concise document that was very well researched, looking at worldwide trends of policing. We supplied that to both the Government and the Opposition in the lead up to the election, and no one, neither the media, the Government, the Opposition or anyone in academia was able to take points away from the arguments that we raised. So if we continue to do it that way, and do it in a professional manner, I think we are always going to be successful in our campaigns.
Having worked in the mines and the waterfront, I know all about industrial muscle. But if you look at the results police have achieved in the past few years, there's a case for a smarter sort of unionism. The muscle has its place, but in policing we have always had our greatest victories when we've had strong community support. And the community aren't dumb.
by Peter Lewis
As the Monarchists pull every trick in the book to maintain the Crown, the Republicans find themselves trapped in a lawyers argument on the model of change, rather than the need to piss the British out of this part of the world once and for all.
They find themselves being squeezed on one-side by the conservatives, the other by the radicals who say the minimalist model does not go far enough. In the process we have the bizarre situation where the Republicans are cast as the "elitists" and the Monarchists advocate a No vote for the people's Republic.
They have to be kidding. But do the ARM blow them out of the water? No way, just another advertisement with kids singing "we are ost-rail-ee-un".
You only have to read the vox pops in the newspapers, "I'm not voting for a model that politicians appoint", "I'm for a Republic, but not this time" - the Monarchists lies are taking hold.
It's time to fight negatives with negatives - put the focus back on the Queen and blow some of scurrilous arguments out of the water. I'm talking shit-sheets here. Low blows, niggling tactics. Our Republican heritage should not be in the hands of the lawyers, it should get back into the gutter.
Highlighting the following points would be a good start.
� To be Australian's Head of State you need to be the consequence of a moment of passion between two blue-blood aristocrats from the other side of the world. Let's draw diagrams if we have to. Without a Royal copulation we would be leaderless.
� The highest ranking Australian, the Governor General, is appointed by one man. The Prime Minister. Almost without exception he is a former judge. Judges tend to come from the local aristocracy, and even the nicest of them receive private school education. Far from being populist the current system allows one man to choose another from a very limited talent pool.
� The Prime Minister is our political leader, the President will only be the figurehead where ultimate power is vested. Just because it will carry the fancy presidential title doesn't mean it will be exercise power over the defence forces and scoring blow-jobs from precocious interns. People who want direct election don't seem to understand this. A popularly elected president would have the legitimacy to act in what he or she perceived to be the national interest, rather than on the advice of the elected government. This is a major change to the system. If I was Malcolm Turnbull, I would have considered advocating a different name for the head of state - Governor may have been a more low-key title than President and would have carried with it the tradition of appointment and ceremony.
� Even if we are to accept the Monarchists' argument that they support the People's Republic, the minimalist model is far more inclusive than the current system. First, there's the public consultation process brokered by Jason Li at the Constitutional convention last year - anyone who wants a say will get one. And the appointment will require the backing of both houses of Parliament meaning (i) partisan appointments will be unlikely and (ii) there is far greater input into the appointment than presently exists.
� The furphy over appointment (not to mention the drinking habits of some of the ARM) have led to the crazy proposition that the republicans are the "elitists". Let's meet this head-on. Let's throw some dirt at those pushing the monarchist line. Starting with Kerry Jones, who may talk like an unemployable primary school teacher, but who is actually the daughter of multi-millionaire nursing home tsar Harry Moran. Let's look at the bluebloods in the ARM organisation - the judges and politicians all from the top end of town. Let's line up the toffs and call them for what they are.
� Finally, we need to get that chip back on the shoulder. We need to emphasize the point that the British still regard us as their colony, their cultural inferiors. To me the killer play would have been filming the Barmy Army at the cricket last summer (I actually made the suggestion to the ARM but they didn't seem to get it). It would have been beautiful, those arrogant, pissed Brits singing it with pride "God Save YOUR Gracious Queen, long live YOUR noble Queen ..." Even James Blundell, would have voted against that.
by Rob Davis
"They've coped so well with what they've been through. It's hard to imagine what they have endured. Some have been used as human shields. And there are young boys who feel guilty because they're here. Many have problems eating, thinking about others who are going hungry. But there are different problems with each plane load."
Employed at Wollongong Hospital, Ariana was seconded to the South Western Sydney Area Health Service for a period of three months to meet the Kosovars on arrival and shepherd them through their first three days in Australia.
Ariana said that her role began when the aircraft landed, usually around midnight, with its 400 passengers. She met the newcomers and assisted as they boarded buses for the ride under Police escort from the airport to the reception centre at East Hills.
Those needing urgent medical attention received treatment on arrival while the others eat. And then rooms were allocated. All of this could take until two or three in the morning, Ariana says.
The following day she was on duty from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., as health screenings were carried out -- she would also accompany anyone needing treatment to nearby Liverpool Hospital if necessary. Then immigration papers were processed and psychologists and social workers conducted their assessments.
After three days of settling in, unless they are too sick to travel or are waiting for relatives to arrive, the Kosovars would leave for their temporary homes.
On the day she was interviewed Ariana was waiting to meet the fifth group of refugees to arrive in Sydney. She was appreciating the short break before making her way to the airport once again but the work she was doing was very rewarding, she said.
Ariana's parents were born in Kosovo but raised their family in Wollongong where Ariana completed her education, gaining a Diploma in Social Sciences.
Passing her examination as an Albanian interpreter more than three years ago, Ariana is registered as such with the Illawarra Area Health Service. She has been a HREA member for four years, since starting work at Wollongong Hospital.
Ariana is grateful for the experience she has had helping those finding temporary sanctuary in Australia. "But I would also like to thank my employer and my workmates who've been really great about it," she said.
There is nothing like a leaked Cabinet document to excite the media, and the wires have been running hot all week - the old Count Yorga (aka David Kemp, Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs)is back in the spotlight.
While his privatisation plans for universities have been howled down by all and
sundry, including to some extent the Prime Minister, we should not assume that the plan will disappear.
The leaked submission has been circulating on email and fax machines since spoken to by Michael Lee, ALP Shadow Minister. If you haven't yet seen a copy of the document, it's available on the NTEU National Website at http://www.nteu.org.au.
Kemp has two clear messages:
. To students and aspiring students - you and your families will be paying near $100,000 for a degree in the future
. To university staff - Government is prepared to bribe Vice-Chancellors to hold out against NTEU claims on salaries and conditions.
What the Government seems prepared to pay for in higher education is non-union agreements, AWAs, increased workloads - span of hours and low pay.
Vice-Chancellors, for all their "worthy" statements in the press and TV must have known something about this for some time. A spate of non-union ballots and an unexpectedly tougher industrial line from some suggests that they have been complicit in negotiating with the government against students and their own staff.
What would the changes mean ?
Kemp's plan is for students to pay fees for each course they undertake. While the Government may pay a "subsidy" (voucher), the major cost to students would be the fees charged by universities.
This year the University of Melbourne is charging $132,000 for a full fee Dentistry degree, while a Law degree costs $75,000. If you aspire to be a Vet, then you would be looking at $144,000.
These are an indication of what universities will charge in a deregulated market. To do this, Kemp wants to scrap HECS, and introduce a loans scheme with a market rate of interest attached.
The implications are clear - under the Kemp plan, it will be the size of your wallet which will determine the course and the university you're able to attend.
Regional and outer suburban universities will find it impossible to compete with the likes of UNSW, Sydney or Melbourne - so we will be back to a two-tiered system. One type of education for the rich, where resources for both staff and students would be plentiful and another group of universities where salaries would be lower and where resources for students would be limited.
Don't be fooled - despite John Howard's attempts to hose down the furore these proposals are real, and must be stopped. NTEU members will be joining students in a National Day of Action on October 21. We would welcome other union members joining the rallies. Details are below.
Say NO TO KEMP Rally October 21
Melbourne: 1.30pm - State Library
Sydney: 1.00pm - Town Hall
Newcastle: 12.30pm - Newcastle University / behind library
Brisbane: 12.00pm - King George Square (subject to permit)
Perth: 1.30pm - Menzies House
Adelaide: 1.30pm - Commonwealth Offices, King William Street
Darwin: 12.30pm - The Breezeway, Casuarina Campus, Northern Territory University
by Elizabeth Dixon
Safety in the building of the Snowy Mountains Scheme was the subject of a NOHSC research study undertaken By Fergus Robinson, an occupational health and safety officer at the Victorian Master Builders' Association, who contributed this article to WORKSAFE news to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Scheme this month.
The Snowy Mountains Scheme has the distinction of being the most complex, multi-purpose, multi-reservoir hydro scheme in the world with its 80 kilometres of aqueducts, 140 kilometres of tunnels, 16 large dams and seven power stations, two of which are underground. The project commenced under an Act of Federal Parliament in October 1949 with the objective of diverting the Murrumbidgee, Snowy and Tumut Rivers in southwestern NSW in order to provide irrigation water for the western side of the Great Dividing Range, and in the process to generate hydro-electric power.
Fourteen major contractors and consortiums were engaged on the project. These included French and US companies as well as Australian. Thiess Bros Pty Ltd, Australia, had the highest value contract.
During the course of the construction over approximately 22 years, at total of 100,000 workers were employed, of whom 121 lost their lives in industrial accidents. Those workers were Australian-born, German, Greek, Irish, Italian, Norwegian, British, Polish and Yugoslav.
Causes of fatalities
The most fatalities (26) were caused by accidents involving operating plant such as bulldozers, haul trucks, cranes and tournapulls (a four-wheel vehicle similar to a grader or front-end loader). These fatalities can be attributed to three main causes:
1. Intense around the clock operation of heavy earthmoving equipment in difficult terrain and weather conditions at the various dam sites.
2. Inadequate servicing and maintenance of vehicle equipment.
3. Extensive deployment of tournapulls. The steering mechanism of these vehicles was operated by a switch which was prone to cut out at low revs. This mode of operation left the driver vulnerable to running off the road.
The second worst category of fatalities was rock falls with 14 deaths due to the individual fall of rocks during tunnelling, followed by tunnel locomotive accidents (13), road accidents to and from worksites (11), objects dropping onto workers (11) and explosions (10). Eight workers were killed due to the failure of non-vehicular mechanical equipment or being in unsafe proximity to unguarded machinery.
Commitment to safety
Evidence suggests that safety performance overall on the Snowy Mountains Scheme was better than its counterparts overseas. The often quoted American target of no more than one person killed per mile of tunnelling was improved on the Snowy Project with an overall underground death rate of 0.6 of a fatality per mile of tunnelling.
The better performance of the Snowy Scheme can be attributed to three factors. First, the relatively high premium placed on human life in Australian workplaces, predicated upon strong democratic traditions and the historical influence of trade unionism which simply did not permit the acceptance of a fatality rate which mirrored overseas practice.
Second, the Snowy Mountains Hydro Electric Authority (SMHEA), as a government agency, accepted responsibility for OHS on the project and saw itself as accountable to the wider community for Project safety performance. Third, the Commissioner of the SMHEA, Sir William Hudson, was genuinely sensitive to the occurrence of fatalities.
The SMHEA undertook both practical and educative measures to reduce the incidence of deaths and serious injuries on the contractors' projects. In 1961, Sir William established the Snowy Mountains Joint Safety and Rehabilitation Council. A safety adviser was appointed and a part time Working Committee, which included the safety officers of all member organisations, met on a regular basis. A policy of occupational health had a high degree of formal prominence on the Snowy Mountains Scheme. Safety induction training and supervisory safety training were introduced, safety films were produced and tool box meetings were held.
Even given the limitations of the technology available at the time, with proper planning and a pre-eminent concern for the safety of the workforce, the fatality and serious injury rate on the Snowy Project could have been drastically reduced. By today's standards, the failure of the safety program lay in the fact that the theory was not translated into practice.
One Snowy veteran, a former tournapull operator, described the work atmosphere on the Project as follows:
Physically, working on the Snowy Scheme was similar to being on war footing. I was familiar with this situation after having lived through heavy bombing as a child during the war. On the job, the Snowy was very much a 'peacetime version' of imminent danger and the will to survive.
Comparison with today
In drawing comparisons between the construction practice on the Snowy Mountains Scheme and similar work undertaken today, it can be reasonably asserted that more recent civil engineering work is significantly safer than the experiences of the two and a half decades of the postwar period.
A similar example is the construction of the Bullocks Flat to Blue Cow (Perisher) Ski Tube by the consortium Kumagai Transfield. Not one fatality was recorded in the period of construction from October 1984 to March 1988. Superior technology was used with the 6.3 kilometre tunnel excavated using a 5.5 metre tunnel boring machine from the Bullock Portal to the Perisher terminal (approximately 3.5 km). For the remaining distance to Blue Cow (approximately 2.8 km), traditional drill and blast methods were used.
Certainly, new technology has reduced the level of risk and this in turn has effected a higher level of OHS expectations. However, there have also been qualitative changes in the way occupational health and safety has been viewed, not only by those in the construction industry but also by the community at large. Simply put, it is no longer acceptable for employers to entertain in the conception of major projects the prospect of a single fatality or multiple serious injuries.
Order your copy/copies of this special issue of WORKSAFE news, published by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission, by contacting Elizabeth Dixon at mailto:[email protected] Subscriptions are free.
About the Research
Fergus Robinson completed his research under the auspices of Dr. Richard Broome from the La Trobe University History Department between 1994 and 1997. The study involved analysis of all the coroners' inquest reports; interviews and questionnaires involving former Snowy employees; an examination of accident data and statistics from one major contractor and a review of all the available archival material both from the Snowy Mountains Hydro Electric Authority and the state and national archives
For further information please contact Fergus Robinson on phone (03) 9411 4521, fax (03) 9411 4592 or email [email protected]
by Ellen Gould
"It [the Internet] will destroy one of the great tyrannies of the past, the tyranny of location. Your accountant may now live anywhere, and already the WTO is saving you a lot of money by outsourcing translation -- thanks to electronic transmission we can use translators working at home in countries all over the world."
From the "THE FUTURE OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN SERVICES", a Speech by Mike Moore, Director-General, World Trade Organization, September, 1999 (available on the Internet at http://www.wto.org/wto/speeches/mm6.htm
So here we have the WTO Director General's bold vision of the future - employers scouring the globe to get work done on the cheap by home-based workers. And he holds up the WTO as a model of how this is being done.
Increasing corporate power to shift services work anywhere in the world is the focus of the new round of negotiations on General Agreement on Services. Anything that limits the "freedom" to do this will be a target.
In preparation for the millennium round of negotiations, the WTO Secretariat has carried out a global investigation to identify any measures governments take that might restrain the corporations' ability to shift service work and reduce what they pay workers.
But do the WTO staff really identify trade barriers as problems because employers cannot pay the lowest possible wages? After all, their own salaries are paid by the taxes of workers in WTO member countries. Shouldn't they at least pretend to be neutral rather than hostile to labour interests?
Perhaps on the assumption that few people would bother to go through them, the WTO has "de-restricted" and posted on their Web site the background papers its Secretariat has prepared to frame the Millennium Round negotiations. Here are some samples of what the Secretariat says, and the places where you can find the original WTO documents so you can check for yourself:
In the retail field, the WTO Secretariat identifies this "Explicit Barrier to Trade":
"33. Given the high labour intensity of distribution (especially in retailing), the sector is affected by limitations on the movement of natural persons [i.e. people]. Nationality requirements for staff prevent firms from minimizing labour costs through international recruitment." Source: "Distribution Services", Background Note by the WTO Secretariat, 1998 Available on the Internet at: http://www.wto.org/wto/services/w65.htm
The WTO staff see a need for employers to be able to recruit foreign workers in the area of environmental services, such as garbage collection, as well:
"30. Given the relatively high labour intensity of some environmental services, such as refuse disposal, the sector is affected by limitations on the movement of natural persons. Nationality requirements for staff prevent firms from minimizing labour costs through international recruitment." "Environmental Services", Background Note by the WTO Secretariat, 1998 Available on the Internet at: http://www.wto.org/wto/services/w65.htm
Of course, there is another way that nationality requirements could be viewed, such as "Nationality requirements for staff prevent firms from threatening to relocate if their workers do not accept low wages"or "Nationality requirements ensure that corporations do not engage in a race to the bottom in terms of working conditions." or "Nationality requirements ensure local communities gain at least some benefits from foreign investment." It all depends on your point of view.
In the health field, the WTO staff say the biggest benefit to be gained is through opening up health services jobs to foreign workers:
"60. (T)he most significant benefits from trade are unlikely to arise from the construction and operation of hospitals, etc., but their staffing with more skilled, more efficient and/or less costly personnel than might be available on the domestic labour market." - "Health and Social Services" Background Note by the WTO Secretariat, 1998, available on the Internet at: http://www.wto.org/wto/services/w65.htm
In order to free up the ability of the firms to "minimize labour costs through international recruitment", WTO negotiatiors on services will discuss rules to make it easier for foreign workers to get temporary work visas. Work is already going on in the WTO to make service employees as interchangeable as possible by eliminating differences in qualification requirements, and reducing these to no more than is necessary in the view of WTO authorities.
The experience with NAFTA shows that giving the maximum flexibility to corporations to hire cheap labour does not help workers in either industrialized or "developing" nations.
(See Pulling Apart: The Deterioration of Employment and Income in North America Under Free Trade, published by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives)
by Dr Lucy Taksa
Unionism: An Australian Tradition
By Oliver Chamlmers, A.S.T.C. (Public Service Association)
ALTHOUGH only a young country, Australia is already rich in tradition.
Consider the titanic conflict just ended. The mention of Kokoda,:El Alamein and Borneo will always serve to keep the memory of Australia green. An Australian nation has been forged in the last 157 years.
Certain characteristics have, in most cases quite justifiably, come to be regarded as typically Australian, such as our independence, initiative, our healthy scorn for the rigid class distinctions of other countries.These are not surprising when we consider how the Australian nation was built in the past century. The gold rushes of the 1850's attracted hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the older countries, nearly all of them staunch democrats who permanently hoped to win in this new country, the peace, security and democratic rights denied them in their home lands.
Chartists from England continued the fight in Australia for manhood suffrage, payment and abolition, of property qualifications for members of parliament- rights now taken for granted by everyone, but not to be gained beneath the Southern Cross in the 1850's without the bloodshed of Eureka.
The right to organise in Unions had also been fought for, not only by lovers of democracy in Ireland, Italy, Germany and other countries of Europe, all of these people flocked to Australia, bent on winning here what they had failed to win in the old Countries against constituted privilege.
Earlier, in the days when Australia was a penal settlement, merit, men had been transported here for daring to attempt to band together in Unions as a protection against the harsh oppression of the owners of the mines, factories and workshops. Notable amongst these were the "six men of Dorset," the Tolpuddle martyrs.
The right to organise in Trade Unions in Australia was established very early in the days of the gold rushes. The forerunner of the present day large and important Amalgamated Engineering Union was founded by Chartists on the way out from England before they actually landed Victoria.
Early struggles of this and other newly formed unions, notably those covering the building trades, were waged round the demand for an eight-hour working day, a right that was secured by 1858, years before it was secured anywhere else in the world.
By the eighties of last century, legislation had been passed by the various parliaments in Australia, legalising Unions, protecting their funds and empowering them to enter contracts on behalf of their members. Federation of the principal unions in the various Australian States was achieved long before Federation of the Colonies.
To-day we find such organisations as the A.C.T.U. (Australasian Council of Trade Unions), a federal body to which are affiliated most of the unions of Australia, including the major ones.
To-day, one person in every six of the Australian population is a member of a Union. Definitely, therefore. Unionism is an important part of the Australian tradition. You may say that it is all very well for the manual workers, but you may not think it the concern of those who work in the professions, the so-called "white collar" workers.
However. it may surprise you that of the million or so unionists in Australia to-day,about a quarter of this number are professional workers. Actors, teachers. scientists, public servants, journalists, nurses and doctors have learnt the value of organisation and unity in safeguarding their interests and advancing their status.
The wide aims of such unions of professional workers are enhanced rather than hindered by increasing membership. The Teachers' Federation, for instance, is exceedingly active in furthering the economicinterests of its members, but at the same time it has had thegratification of seeing its very comprehensive and progressive plan for the betterment of theeducational system endorsed and adopted at an annual conference of the A.C.T.U.
A hundred per cent union membership amongst nurses would not only improve their status and conditions but by way of an example, would add weight to any campaign for putting into action plans for a better and more efficient application of medical science to the needs of the community.
Dave Morris and Helen Steel are members of a branch of Greenpeace who battle to save the world by standing outside the Golden Arches and handing out pamphlets telling customers how bad the mega-national is.
It's the sort of innocent, na�ve grassroots campaigning that really gets under the skins of the Big Boys who spend hundreds of millions each year taking credit for every facet of the good life, from birth the dignified old age, through the sale of junk food.
Even the claim "junk food" above would have been enough to give Maccas a go at Workers Online in court before Helen and Dave fought what became Britain's longest ever running case.
Scores of publications had received the same treatment, a legal summons demanding a grovelling Mc-Cheesy apology or the prospect of a costly court battle against an opponent you could never outspend. They all ate the brown matter.
Except Helen and Dave have no money, so they have nothing to loose. They say "buggar you", we have nothing to apologise for, and even less after this little incident.
And so the case begins. Pitted against a team of QCs and their highly-paid juniors, Dave and Helen represent themselves, establishing a network of volunteers and arguing the case against all the allegations they had made on the pamphlet. And McDonalds defends itself.
As they make their way painstakingly through the evidence from rainforest clearance in the Third World to the health implications of its product, its treatment of its workers and manipulative advertising, McDonlads is called to account.
Dave and Helen don't win legally on every count, but they force a public examination of corporate practices that unfold into a public relations disaster for the Big M - ensuring they will never launch another McLibel for a long time to come. This means can now say that McDonalds are "bastard bully boys whose corporate practices are a blight on humanity wrapped up in cynically manipulated McSmiles" without running the risk of sending the Labor Council bankrupt.
This documentary is as delightfully understated and wry as our two heroes, a great modern day fable.
And Dave and Helen? Still without having paid McDonalds a cent, although paying for their commitment in more tangible ways, they've turned their little environmental cell into an international organisation dedicated to calling Maccas to account, through the website McSpotlight: http://www.mcspotlight.org.uk. whcih will this weekend hold Worldwide Anti-McDonalds Day. Only this time, they won't be sued.
by The Chaser
France. To most people it's the country of love, a land of fine cuisine and great red wine.
Yet there has always been another side to the fourth largest economy in the world. At a time when most Western theorists and politicians are proclaiming class is dead, France shows once again that the old mole of struggle can surface unexpectedly.
The country which in 1968 gave the world the biggest mass strike in history and saw the rule of capital shaken is now experiencing a number of industrial and political battles.
The Government is what Lionel Jospin, the Socialist Party Prime Minister, calls "a plural left" coalition. Apart from the Socialist Party it includes the Communists and Greens. There have been major struggles to force it to the Left.
Last year massive student demonstrations against cuts forced the left-wing Government to promise an increase in education funding. But it has not delivered.
One high school student was quoted in the major French newspaper Le Monde as saying: "After last year's demonstrations they promised something would change by this year. But we've seen nothing. We still don't have enough teachers."
So last week 150,000 students took to the streets demanding changes. The students have threatened more demonstrations if the Government does not provide a better education system.
But it is not only students who are protesting. Lorry drivers recently blockaded refineries in parts of the country. Thousands of workers at the Michelin tyre company demonstrated against threatened job cuts.
Grape pickers in some areas went on strike for a cut in their working hours to create more jobs. They won.
The US has been trying to force France to accept genetically modified beef. In retaliation a radical farmers' organisation wrecked a McDonalds in Millau in the south of the country. When the leader was jailed, trade unions and the left joined protests in his defence.
The National Assembly met last Monday to debate the 35 hour week without loss of pay. Outside there were rival demonstrations of workers and employers.
Although the level of industrial struggle is much higher in France than in Australia, it does not mean the left-wing Government is in trouble. In fact Lionel Jospin's Government is popular. The economy is growing at a faster rate than in recent years and unemployment has fallen.
The Government is also helped by the fact that the conservatives are deeply split and bickering among themselves.
The main reason for Jospin's popularity is that he has so far been able to balance the demands of employers and workers.
In the successful 1997 election campaign Jospin and employment minister Martine Aubry promised to cut the working week from 39 hours to 35 without loss of pay. They argued this would give workers a better quality of life and help cut unemployment by creating more jobs. The pledge is incredibly popular among working people.
The 35 hour week is central to the high standing of the Government among workers and typifies the swing to the left in French politics in recent years. That swing dates from December 1995 when massive public sector strikes paralysed the nation. As a consequence of the strikes the Socialist Party moved to the left and the Greens and Communist Party won increasing support.
The leftward shift in the whole of French society saw the plural left coalition win Government in 1997.
However, Jospin and company remain committed to capitalism. This comes out clearly in a consideration of the 35 hour week.
The new 35 hour law builds on an earlier law passed a year ago.
A number of 35 hour agreements have been signed under that earlier law. However, the agreements have given the employers "flexibility" in implementing the 35 hour week. What this means is that employers have been able to average the number of hours worked over the year rather than being forced to provide 35 hours work each week.
With such flexibility, the standard day and paid overtime are under threat. So Jospin gives and takes at the same time.
The balancing act between labour and capital that the Prime Minister finds himself undertaking is highlighted by the Michelin affair. The tyre company announced recently that they were going to sack thousands of employees.
At first Jospin shrugged his shoulders and said the Government could not prevent the company from laying off people. Workers across France became angry at the inadequacy of the Government response.
The Communist Party, part of the government, called for a major protest over unemployment on 16 October. Others in the government flirted with backing the march.
Jospin reversed his previous do-nothing position and announced a number of initiatives to prevent profitable companies like Michelin from sacking workers.
He suggested that the Government would cut off all public funding to profitable companies if they laid off workers. And he said it should be illegal for a company to sack workers before it had tried to avoid job losses by cutting working hours.
These promises did not come out of the air. Pressure from ordinary workers is forcing Jospin to develop left-wing proposals. Such pressure will also be necessary to make him deliver on these promises.
At least in France the class struggle is not dead. And workers can benefit as a result.
John Passant is a Canberra-based writer.
The call has come from the international trade union organisation FIET - which also wants the Rugby World Cup Executive to discuss the issue at its meeting in Dublin this week.
Geneva based FIET - along with two other international union groupings -wants the World Cup authorities to sign up to a six page Code of Practice which outlaws child labour and insists on human rights for workers who make official merchandise.
The manufacturer of the rugby balls - Gilbert - is reported as denying newspaper allegations that child labour was used in the stitching of the balls in India.
"We're not talking about the balls that end up on the pitch, we are talking about the thousands of balls being sold to the fans as official merchandise," said FIET General Secretary Philip Jennings.
"This is big business and we believe the rugby authorities have a responsibility to ensure that all official merchandise is produced under conditions which conform to the standards laid down by the ILO.
"There have been conflicting accounts and we believe the ILO itself can best establish the facts through their local office in India.
"If there is no problem in India with these balls then nobody will be happier than FIET. It should then be a simple matter for the authorities to sign up to a Code of Practice and ensure that suppliers monitor their sub-contractors."
FIET, along with International Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers Federation, have made a new approach to the International Rugby Board and Rugby World Cup Ltd.
They have offered dates for a meeting on the issue and to help in setting up a verification programme to ensure that agreements outlawing exploitation are enforced down the production chain.
"If this has happened with the manufacturing of rugby balls, then similar scenarios could be envisaged in the manufacturing of shirts, shorts, boots and other apparel used during the World Cup matches," says the letter from the three organisations.
by Mark Lennon
Their first attempt to implement this policy in 1997 did not receive the support of the cross benches in the Senate and as a consequence the legislation was withdrawn.
Recently the Government has sought to reintroduce the legislation and at the present time is negotiating with the Democrats on the issue.
At the outset it should be made clear that choice of fund is not something new. In NSW for instance, there has been a provision in the Industrial Relations Act allowing an employee to choose a fund other than those designated by their award since 1991. However under this provision the employee elects to make a choice rather than being forced to do so as under the Federal Governments proposal.
More prevalent than choice of fund however has been investment choice within a fund. This involves funds offering members choice of investment strategies which have different risk return profiles. Generally funds offering this type of service will have three or four choices ranging from a high growth strategy to a more conservative capital secure.
In its original form the Federal Governments proposal would have seen employers having to offer either an unlimited choice of funds or a limited choice of four funds. The limited offer had to include the employers fund, the relevant industry fund, a public offer fund and a retirement savings account. Both the unlimited and limited offers had to include a default fund should the employee not elect to make their own choice.
The major concern about the proposal is whether employees will be able to make an informed choice. The likelihood is that members will be bombarded by the retail sector offering a smorgasbord of funds. The risk being that members will make a choice not fully understanding the implications for their retirement plans. This could have implications for the broader community because if the problem becomes widespread and individuals have made insufficient provision for their retirement it could undermine the national retirement incomes policy.
The experience in the United Kingdom with choice serves as a warning. In the mid 80s employees in the UK were given the opportunity to opt out of their company schemes and move to personal pension plans. Many employees took up this option without understanding the consequences. They lost their employer contributions and other benefits and often incurred higher administration costs. Many individuals are now taking action against the providers of the plans for providing misleading advice.
From the union movements perspective clearly there is a belief that industry funds have and will continue to deliver for members. Good returns, low administration costs and an increasing level of services, including investment choice, means that industry funds are the best value for members and therefore make the value of choice questionable.
The Federal Governments proposal is based more on ideological grounds rather than sound policy. I hope the Democrats see it that way as well.
by Naomi Steer
My immediate response to Piers outraged call to me about the dinner was YAWN YAWN. Our conversation went something like this:
Me: "Yes its true Piers .We are holding a Women's Dinner of which the majority attendees will be surprise surprise..... Women.!"
Clever Peers springs his trap.. "Ha but (....and here it comes folks) isn't that discriminatory -I'm sure you would be the first to object if men organised a men only function.".:
Really Piers you disappoint me. I hoped for something more original ,cutting, perhaps a little humour..Could it be that even you are bored in raising this hoary old chestnut.? Must I really go over this again.? Unfortunately it appears I have to..
"But Piers nearly every other dinner I go to is a men's dinner."
I start listing off the many functions I go to or know of where women either are not represented or in the minority. How many women attend the HR Nicholls Society dinners(but lets face it however how many of us would want to).Because of course while men continue to hold the most powerful positions in politics, the corporate world and yes in the union movement ,lunches, dinners,, meetings ,conferences are organised by men for men and around men's issues.
Piers response is pretty limp, "But they don't call them Men's dinners."
Silly me .I should have realised that what we are talking about is semantics not about what happens in the real world.
And what happens in the real world is that unless women organise together, network and agitate then there is no way that issues effecting women will ever get on the social, political, .industrial or business agendas.
Women across the political spectrum know this which is why as I pointed out to Piers there are so many organisations out there organising women only functions. These include the National Council of Women, .the Federation of Business and Professional Women, the YWCA, the Country Women's Association (of which my grandmother was a founding member), and shock horror even the Liberal party. Funny that none of these get a serve in Piers column. Can I assume that its only women in trade unions that Piers has a problem with?
Piers if you want to talk about real discrimination lets look at the recent disgraceful funding cuts to women's organisations climaxing in the recent defunding of a number of women's organisations including the Girl Guides Association in favour of the Lone Fathers Association.! Lets look at the number of mothers forced out of the workforce because of childcare cuts. Lets look at the growing gap between men and women's earning under the Howard/Rieth industrial agenda.
Having said all of this you may be surprised that I agree with Piers on one point. Yes Piers ,Michael Costa's attendance at the dinner was probably tokenistic. But gee isn't it nice that we are talking about the token man and not the token woman for once. Maybe we are making progress after all.
© 1999-2000 Labor Council of NSW LaborNET is a resource for the labour movement provided by the Labor Council of NSW URL: http://workers.labor.net.au/35/print_index.htmlLast Modified: 15 Nov 2005 [ Privacy Statement | Disclaimer | Credits ] LaborNET is proudly created, designed and programmed by Social Change Online for the Labor Council of NSW |