Acting Labor Council secretary John Robertson sounded the warning as an estimated 25,000 striking teachers rallied outside the gates of State Parliament in anger at the Labor Government's handling of the dispute.
"The approach of the Labor Government should be a warning to all public servants" Robertson said. "It is the first step on the road to individual contracts."
Education minister John Aquilina was dubbed the 'Terry Metherell of the Nineties' after the Department bypassed the Teachers Federation to send its pay offer directly to the homes of teachers.
Thousands of teachers made their reply to the offer at the rally, by dumping the draft award on the Parliament's forecourt.
Robertson said the Minister had been captured by bureaucrats and was not listening to parents or teachers about the need to properly fund public education.
"The Minister has sought to present you as the villains,' he said. "the real villains are on the other side of the fence."
Aquilina, Boston Should Go
The striking public school teachers have called on Aquilina and his departmental chief Ken Boston to resign claiming they had misled the public in the lead-up to Thursday's statewide strike.
Teachers' official Barry Sexton produced documents directly contradicting statements from Aquilina that school principals had not been intimidated into opposing the industrial action.
Sexton produced a fax from Education Department head Ken Boston, directing principals to defy the strike action and keep schools open.
"Either the Minister has lied or he is completely out of touch with what is happening in his portfolio," he told the rally.
The government outraged teachers when it attempted to bypass the union and deal directly with teachers by posting its proposed pay deal on the internet and sending it to teachers' homes. This was after refusing to discuss wages and conditions with the union for 15 months.
Under the government's proposed award, full-time teachers would have received pay rises of just four per cent over four years - less than the rate of inflation - while casual teachers would have actually received a $44 per month pay cut.
The teachers had the backing of the Parents and Citizens Association as well as Opposition and cross-bench MPs who combined to condemn that government's handling of the dispute.
In a bizarre twist, Opposition leader Kerry Chikarovski publicly called on the Carr government to recognise the Teachers Federation and deal with it.
Chikarovski told ABC radio she could understand the Teacher's frustration with the Minister's refusal to meet with them and called on Carr to begin meaningful talks.
More Action in Public and Private Schools
This week's stoppage will be followed by a series of rolling strikes in public schools in the lead-up to Christmas, as well as stoppages next week in 500 Catholic Schools.
Independent Education Union state secretary Patrick Lee says his members are also affected by the Government's handling of teachers' pay because their salary levels are linked to their public sector colleagues.
Lee says the Carr government's provocative attitude to teachers and current proposals are the worst offered by any State Government in decades - including the work of Jeff Kennett in Victoria and Terry Metherell in this state in the late eighties.
Teachers Federation president Sue Simpson later thanked the Labor Council and affiliates for their support of the strike. A long line of union leaders from across the factions attended the rally, with Robertson promising Labor Council's ongoing support.
What to let off a bit of Aquilina Anger? Go to Deface a Face and go wild!
Reith told today's meeting of state and federal labour ministers that he would not need State financial support to convinvce Treasurer Peter Costello and the Cabinet to approve the protection package, sparked by the plight of the Oakdale miners.
Sources at the meeting say Reith put up two proposals, both costed at $100 million to set up, for either a compulsory insurance scheme or a government-funded scheme.
But he conceded neither scheme would fully reimburse workers for lost entitlements and no details were offered as to where the thresholds should lie.
Queensland indicated in principle support, NSW said it would have to go to Cabinet, although NSW industrial relations minister said he wanted the matter dealt with urgently.
It is also understood that Financial Services Minister Joe Hockey is moving forward with changes to corporations law propsed by Shaw at the height of the Oakdale criss.
These include holding comany directors and employers personally liable for unpaid entitlements.
New Balance on Council
Enjoying a majority for the first time in a decade, the Labor States have used a meeting of state and federal industrial relations ministers to promote a common agenda.
From being in a minority of one just two years ago, Shaw was this week joined by Paul Braddy (Queensland), Monica Gould (Victoria) and Peter Patmore (Tasmania) at the regular meeting..
In joint statement after the meeting the Labor ministers:
- condemned the federal government for dragging its feet on the protection of employee entitlements.
- called for a national approach to halt the exploitation of clothing outworkers.
- called for a national safety code to stem the fatality rate in the truck industry.
- and rejected the federal government's attempts to dismantle minium working conditions.
"Labor will turn the tide on the Reith wave and restore the balance in industrial relations to one of an independent umpire, equitable work conditions with minium standards and a spirit of co-operation between employers and employees which will encourage investment," they said.
It is the first time in 44 years that ALP Governments have held power along the eastern seaboard.
Focus on Truck Deaths
The Labor Ministers accused conservatives states, led by federal workplace relations minister Peter Reith of running down national safety standards, cutting projects in the National Safety Standard program by two-thirds.
"It is a national disgrace that the Federal Government has played fast and loose with workers' safety," they said.
Changes to industrial relations have also increased driver danger, with drivers forced to work longer and harder - meaning excessive speeds and fatigue on the road.
They said one agreement, approved under Reith's laws required drivers to travel at an average of 90kmh, regardless of safety conditions.
"One hundred and seventy nine people were killed in accidents involving articulated trucks on Australian roads in 1998," they said.
"The only way to stem this toll is to ensure drivers have reasonable working conditions and stringent and enforceable safety requirements in place."
Sharan Burrow, the only national union secretary to attend the two-day conference, told the 180 delegates from around Australia and the Pacific that "traditional hierarchies are sometimes good, sometimes not so good in the way ideas are debated."
"You must take a leadership role by dint of your knowledge," she said. "You must continue to put up ambit claims around the technology budgets and argue them through your organisations."
Delegates also heard from international Internet activists Marc Belanger and Eric Lee, Labor's federal IT spokeswoman Senator Kate Lundy as well as participating in workshops on issues such as Internet privacy, organsing IT workers and on-line education.
Unions Must Become Information Organisers
Belanger's keynote address was a wake-up call to anyone who thinks all unions have to do to survive in the Information Age is to set up a home page. The creator of Soli-Net argued that the changes we are confronting are so profound that they can not be met with answers - but by asking better questions.
"You can't commit yourself to a prototype today that may not exist tomorrow," he warned. "The Internet as we know it will disappear, it will be the technologies built on the Internet that will change our world."
Belanger called on unionists to become technology organisers; focussing on understanding existing technologies and using them to develop new people organising techniques.
He was backed by ACTU secretary elect Greg Combet, who addressed delegates at a reception hosted by Virtual Communities, stressing the need for unions to "use the technologies in a political way."
Combet said the development of information technology would be a key theme of the ACTU Council meeting in December and committed the ACTU to building up services to affiliates over time.
They are refusing to discuss annual leave arrangements, which the Australian Services Union, should be extended from four weeks to five to compensate for non-standard hours that workers are routinely rostered to work.
ASU Services Branch organiser Sally McManus says the problem is that there is no call centre award in place and therefore no industry norm.
But she says that the principle of five weeks annual leave for workers rostered to work on Sundays and public holidays is standard in industries where
"We have tried to talk to management, but they take the position that this is none of our business," McManus says.
And she says it's not just Ozemail workers who are entitled to extra holidays - anyone working in a call centre or IT company who is rostered to work non-standard working weeks could have a claim.
"With Christmas coming up, it's definitely worth checking whether you're getting the holidays you deserve," she says.
ASU services organiser Sally McManus says thousands of workers in the IT industry will be in the hot seat on December 31 as anxious employers and authorities wait to see whether the predictions of computer chaos are realised.
"While everyone else is out partying IT workers will be expected to be staring into a computer screen waiting to see if the world collapses," McManus says.
The ASU is making the 400 per cent claim, which would bring IT professionals into line with public servants and emergency workers, on a workplace by workplace basis.
McManus says IT workers should be asking their employees now whether they will be rostered on and find out how much they'll be paid for it.
Carr Called to Match Deal for Carers
Workers in non-government organisations providing vital community services want the Carr Government to match its millennium pay deal for public servants.
The Australian Services Union, representing workers in the community sector, says the government should provide additional funding to NGOs to meet the claim.
The deal would affect people working in residential facilities for people with disabilities and young people, as well as homeless persons' agencies, ASU services branch secretary Alison Peters says..
While public servants have been offered a 400 per cent bonus for working New years Eve, community workers in services that have been contracted out by the government have missed out on the deal.
The ASU says the only way they will be able to receive a decent rate is for the state government - which funds the NGO services - to provide additional funding for the night.
Labor council has endorsed the claim and forwarded it to the premier and Community Services Minister Fay Lo Po
The threatened action - which is not linked to any wage claim - comes in response to growing concerns about the state of NSW public hospitals from bed closures, under-funding, budget over-runs, the withdrawal of strategic funding and a general shortage of nurses.
A meeting of 200 NSW Nurses Association delegates this week set the deadline, calling for urgent discussions between Knowles, Association officials and working nurses.
Nurses secretary Sam Moait says her members realise the demand for extra funding may have implications for future wage claims, but they recognise that funding levels are no longer viable.
Moait says stress levels for her members have reached breaking point as they are forced to be the public face of government cost-cutting.
"Nurses at the frontline are having to deal with the aggression of patients and their relatives when told: there's no bed, no staff, no operating list, no doctor to discharge you and just not enough nurses to give you the care you deserve," Moait says,.
Nurses at Westmead Hospital stopped work for two hours today. Additional action is already planned for the North Coast, Illawarra, Nepean, St Vincents Darlinghurst, the Hunter and the Greater Murray. Without the Minister's intervention, Moait says statewide action is inevitable.
by HT Lee
UN personnel inspecting the finished pre-fab were very impressed with it. The UN is now looking into providing similar shelters for East Timor.
The 14 multi-purpose pre-fabs are the CFMEU's and the building industry's contribution towards the reconstruction of East Timor. They will will be erected throughout East Timor in secured compounds and will provide temporary shelter for the East Timorese. Eventually the buildings will be handed over to the local people for use as community centres in the village/town they are built.
Each pre-fab has a main hall which can house up to 400 beds. There are also eight separate office spaces for use by aid agencies or as health clinics or for dispensing medical, clothing, food and other aid materials.
The pre-fabs were never intended to be used as administrative centres or accommodation for aid agencies and their foreign workers--this misunderstanding with the aid agency CARE is now being sorted out.
The CFMEU has a history of helping in reconstruction--Darwin after Cyclone Tracy, Ningan after the flood and the recent Sydney bush fire.
CFMEU Victorian State Secretary Martin Kingham who was in Dili with the pre-fab said: 'We will continue to work closely with the Timorese through the CNRT to complete erecting the remaining pre-fabs for the Timorese.'
Part of the aim of the project is to train the EastTimorese in the construction industry--working in a safe environment with proper wages and conditions.
The Australian Services Union had accused management of Big Brother tactics after charges were laid against 10 staff members, based on information captured in the State Rail computer system, for allegedly claiming pay when they were not at work.
Of the 10 employees charged, five were completely exonerated, three received final warnings and two were dismissed, and subsequently redeployed on suspension with pay whilst an independent review of the dismissals is undertaken.
"At the end of all this, the SRA has invested hundreds of hours pursuing this group of workers to discover that nine hours were not worked, but claimed over six months," ASU services branch assistant secretary George Panigiris says.
In a hearing before the Australian Industrial Relations Commission this week, the SRA agreed it would not use this type of information in disciplinary investigations until protocols are negotiated with the Labor Council and rail unions.
Labor Council acting secretary John Robertson welcomed then outcome, saying there had been undertakings
Country Rail Unrest Threatens to Escalate
Meanwhile, country rail services were disrupted this week when workers at the Broadmeadow Train Control Centre walked out for 24 hours.
The stike was called after the State Rail Authority refused to pay an eight per cent wage rise handed down in the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.
Senior deputy president Lea Drake awarded the increase under the work value principle after new 91 wagon trains were introduced.
ASU assistant secretary George Panigiris says the decision to appeal the increase rather than pay up was "outrageous and an insult to Labor's traditional support base".
The issue was resolved late Friday following the intervention of Transport Minister Carl Scully and the NSW Labor Council.
by Paddy Gorman
The vital evidence emerged this week in the CFMEU's case against the unfair dismissal of 16 union members at Blair Athol who were retrenched in July last year.
In an attempt to discover how Rio Tinto's selection criteria for retrenchment works, the CFMEU subpoenaed management notebooks that were not orignially presented by the company.
One in particular was found to have been tampered with and when it was referred to a forensic expert in document examination, reference was discovered of a management directive that those on the "Black List were unlikely 7 or 8" on the criteria scale needed to secure jobs.
The expert presented evidence that the original notes had been written over to replace the term "Black list" as "Rating List". there were seceral other instances of altering the original reference to "Black List" throughout the notes - written eight months before the 16 unionists were sacked.
When called in evidence, the manager questioned claimed privilege not to answer questions which could incriminate him.
by Mark Hearn
Over the last six years municipal toilet cleaner Jim Anderson has had eight needle stick injuries from discarded syringes dropped by Cabramatta's heroin users. And according to his employer, Fairfield City Council, it's all Jim's own fault.
Helpfully, Fairfield Council wrote to Jim earlier this year, and reminded him that 'you must avoid needle stick injuries whilst performing your duties'. The Council says he has had needle stick injuries 'sustained by yourself'. Like Jim runs around shoving himself into needles. Jim must comply with OH&S procedures, the letter warned, or face redeployment - and a reduction in income.
In all, Fairfield Council staff have filed 27 needle stick injury claims since 1996. So far, Jim has been lucky: tests have revealed that he has avoided hepatitis or HIV. Municipal Employees Union Organiser Sonja Terpstra says the Council's letter to Jim is "completely unacceptable. Jim's got a difficult job, with the enormous stress of dealing with the consequences of heroin use, and the excruciating wait for blood test results. The Council needs to be supportive of Jim, and not try to shift the responsibility to him, and threaten him with redeployment."
Jim didn't actually apply for a job as a human pin cushion. It's just that there is a syringe epidemic in Cabramatta, and Jim and his workmates have got the job of trying to clear them away. Perhaps before anyone notices that heroin is a problem way out of control. "Three times a week I empty the syringe boxes in the Council toilets", Jim says. "They're always full."
In just one fortnight Jim and his workmates collected 3,500 discarded syringes. From toilet blocks and window sills, gutters and trees, playgrounds and footpaths. OH&S procedures declare that Jim must use "long handle brushes, tongs, gloves and containers." Try using tongs to extract a syringe wedged in the s-bend of a toilet. And gloves aren't much use for a needle stick in the back of the leg, from a syringe poking out of a garbage bin.
Noel Thomas, the cleaners supervisor and MEU delegate says, "you've got to have your wits about you. You can't relax at all." Noel says the sheer quantity of needles to be collected each week would strain the most stringent safety strategy. Jim adds, "I spend hours each shift, just picking up needles".
The MEU wants positive action from Fairfield Council. The union wants recognition of the needle stick injury problem in the staff enterprise agreement. Sonja says "the Council's cleaners have been patient, but the problem has gone on too long. That's why they've been forced to take industrial action."
The MEU also wants Government action. General Secretary Brian Harris says "having one injecting room trial in Kings Cross is simply inadequate. The problem is much bigger than that. There is an urgent need for a permanent safe injecting room in Cabramatta, and to get the syringes off the streets and out of the playgrounds."
As Jim's fellow worker Alan Dickson adds, "a safe injecting room would encourage users off the streets. They'd have somewhere to go, and it would significantly reduce deaths."
There is an unsafe injecting room in the Cabramatta's main car park. It's the Council toilet block. Every day, a small van reverses into its dedicated parking spot next to the toilet, to begin another session of what used to be called the needle exchange program. They don't call it that anymore. When around 1,000 syringes are distributed every day, and about 60 - or 9 - are returned, it's not much of an exchange.
A battle-weary procession of users trudge towards the van. Young men and women. Gaunt mothers pushing baby strollers. They take their needles and go. Some of them don't go very far. Five times Jim has arrived to clean the toilet block to discover a dead human being, another overdose statistic. Cabramatta's Hughes Street car park is a centre of the local heroin trade, barely pausing when a Police car takes an occasional circuit.
Jim and his fellow council workers don't labour alone: the usual staffing shortfall is quietly made up by local residents collecting used needles while they're out walking the dog, and trying to preserve their community against the odds. As Noel Thomas observes, "there's some good people out there. You find they're usually in their sixties."
They may never give Jim the Order of Australia. After all, he's just an ordinary bloke, doing his job - a job most others would never do, for a problem many pretend does not effect them. But it would be nice if Jim had some sort of recognition, other than the insult that Fairfield City Council adds to injury. Blaming people like Jim simply increases the pool of victims and scapegoats. Meanwhile, out at Cabramatta, they need a solution. Now.
The cleaners voted to return to work on Monday 15 November after the employer agreed to stop cutting working hours, at least until 19 February 2000.
In the meantime a Government -backed review, headed by an independent chairperson, will examine all the issues at sites where Menzies is the employer.
The Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union (LHMU), which covers the cleaners, expects the review to recognise that the cleaners were 'being asked to do the impossible' by Menzies.
LHMU NSW Secretary Annie Owens said that 'cuts to hours have meant that many of our members are expected to clean a classroom in six minutes and a toilet in less than three minutes.
'The strike has achieved a moratorium on the cuts and convinced the State Government to back this review.'
The resolution to the dispute came after hours of Commission hearings and meetings between the LHMU, Menzies and Public Works Minister Morris Iemma on Friday 12 and Saturday 13 november.
Menzies and two other contract cleaning companies are one year into five-year contracts to clean schools and other NSW Government buildings.
Cleaners have been under increasing pressure since the Greiner Government privatised the Government Cleaning Service in 1994.
by Dermott Brown
The agreement will 'freeze' some employees pay, remove pay increments and reduce the salary range for the job by $10,000 per annum.
Staff are concerned that this agreement is being pushed on them at the same timec as Telstra board members have been granted a 53% pay increase.
Wendy Caird, National Secretary of the CPSU, said "If Telstra is committed to providing first class customer service, it must attract and keep its high quality frontline staff. By reducing the value of the work these people do, Telstra is sending the wrong message to its staff, its customer and its shareholders."
The union points out that in justifying the recent increase for Telstra board members, Communications Minister, Richard Alston said "When you are talking about the largest company in Australia you expect it to pay world's best rates if it is to attract top quality people."
"Surely this same rule should apply to those staff who actually deal with customers day in, day out." Caird says.
"The community has a right to expect professional customer service from Australia's biggest company and Telstra has an obligation to provide it. By downgrading this work they are short-changing the community."
by Mary Yaager
When Mark Poi fell 50 meters to his death, his employer, a contractor did not have even the basic systems in place and unions believe Mark would be alive today if more attention was paid to safety on the site.
The RTA however, still continued to give work to these contractors without making sure that they had adequate safety procedures in place and therefore this led to more deaths and serious injuries.
The unions said to the Government enough is enough and demanded action which resulted in the Inquiry.
The Inquiry made 43 recommendations and the majority of these were made by the unions. The RTA has agreed to implement all of these recommendations and this week launched their Contractor safety pack.
Contractors will now be required to meet the health and safety standards outlined by the RTA in the Contractors Health & Safety Pack.
Mary Yaager Labor Councils Watchdog who was on a member of the Ministerial Inquiry welcomes this move by the RTA in tightening up OHS assessments at the prequalification and tender stages however says there is still a long way to go.
Yaags says that she can promise that the construction industry unions will give all the support they can to the implementation of contractor pack. After all we would not have it if it was not for the unions.
Upper House president Meredith Burgman will chair the debate, at the Thurles Castle Hotel, 200 Cleveland Street Chippendale this Sunday, November 21.
Further details call Trevor Davies on 0416 347 501.
You claim to be a representative of the worker and then pour a bucket of shit on anyone and everyone who voted no in the referendum. Come on out here to Penrith shit for brains and ask people why they wouldn't vote for your Eastern Suburbs latte republic. You will say we were all too stupid, we were uneducated, we were confused, etc etc. We voted no because it was a tenth rate issue pushed by eleventh rate Labor try hards like you. It was pushed by people who use the working class and the trade union movement to get jobs as political staffers and hopefully members of Parliament. Quite frankly Lewis we rank and file union members in the West are sick and tired of being laughed out and treated with contempt by inner city lefties with funny glasses. We are workers who are doing it tough. You idiots claim to represent us when you despise us. Well we gave you Swanboy the first big boot last Saturday. And there will be more to come.
So Lewis get back to your chardonnay and your sourdough foccacia at the Swans. You make me sick.
Declan O'Neill
Ed's reply: But what do you really think?
Given John Howard's deception and betrayal of the Australian people and his determination to "brown-nose" the English Royal family perhaps he deserves the title of "The Royal Felcher, Knight Minor of the Order of the Choking Gerbil" or "The Royal Gerbil" for short.
Take heart Republicans and may the Nation never forget the absolute dishonesty shown by this dispicable little man.
Greg McAuliffe
********
Viva Republica
At last I see an expression of what I needed to have confirmed in Workers Online.
That is, what I have known to be true for some time, the rhetoric of conservatism is a con.
On one hand they claim they are a government by the majority for the majority above the wishes of "special interests", they use this horrible anti social phrase cynically whenever they wish to demoralise and undermine those smaller groups in the community that do not have the numbers to enforce change.(All you disappointed republicans just stop and imagine what the Original Aussies feel like, knowing their aspirations will never be realised due to lack of support and numbers, I now have a new appreciation of their plight)
Then we see the hypocritical personal position taken by the PM John Coward, to support his "special interest group" the minority monarchist position, by using his office to actively undermine the legitimate wishes of 70-80% of the public that wanted both an Australian head of state and citizenship instead of subjecthood. He also deliberately marginalised the process of the constitutional convention, which by the way I naively but enthusiastically participated in as a member of the public by making a written submission of my own.
The bastard knew from the start all he had to do was undermine the process and wait until he was only a week or two out from the referendum to make the Prime Ministers negative views known. This he knew historically would in itself derail the push for a republic, this manouver also had the affect of minimising any possible arguments against his position due to the time available(Sounds like the last fed election doesn't it?), all this he knowingly did so as to make sure people were left with doubts about the proposal.
Even after I saw his manouvering to minimise the convention debate to a couple of weeks, which at the time felt like a near fatal stab to my social heart, I was still hopeful the public would see through his machinations, I was sadly wrong, as it turned out he did a fantastic wrecking job on us all, I now feel betrayed by that wrecking toad faced prick ( I have taken to calling him the "Cane Toad" i.e. wrecking toad) and will never forgive him for his self interested actions. I have never been a militant or even regular union member as most of my jobs have been semi skilled and these work places are always controlled by the man, to even mention unions let alone belong was and is a dangerous thing, well no more, I am now a sworn blood enemy of conservatism due to the horrible willful and cynical process of wrecking my dreams for evolving this our community into an Australia Fair Republic.
Therefore to all the Union people fighting the good fight for people like me, I would like to take this opportunity to publicly apologise for not standing beside you when you were fighting in the "trenches" so let it be known that from now on I for one will volunteer myself to any union in trouble and in need of support, all you need to do now is ask and I will join your pickets and fight for what is right. I can no longer in good conscience accept the good life I have without standing up for the Unions that fought for me in the past and made this a semi-fair country, I can see that the worldwide conservative attitude, that Coward is so happy to emulate, is taking over, I will no longer sit and watch what you people have built up for me go down the drain, I know that my anger may have come to late for the republic cause but all I can say in defense of my inaction is I really thought the debate would be fair, but as it turned out, this was very stupid of me.
Yours Very Sincerely Rob Clark Perth West Aust.
VIVA OUR FAIR REPUBLIC!!!!!!!!!!
*******************
A Bit of a Wank
Come off it Peter , your editorial of 12th November was a bit of a wank.
I`m a Labor supporter, and I like most of my associates voted NO , in the referendum.
With people like Hawke , Keating and Sartor supporting it one tends to think something is awry.
Even Cocky Carr has got the message , why can`t you.
Tom Collins
*************
Republic Debate Requires Constitutional Debate
I am largely in agreement with the editorial and all your correspondents in issue #39 on the aftermath of the election. However, I do feel the need to make a few points.
1. Disenfranchisement is a major issue greater than the republic debate. However, greater enfranchisement requires constitutional debate. The issue is: is representative democracy, or executive government, good enough? Is it time we moved towards 'participatory' democracy, underpinned by what John Uhr and others call 'deliberative' democracy? Dissatisfaction with political elites stems from two main sources: the system is designed so that elites act on our behalf, and (while that may have been appropriate for a society that is rapidly evolving into something else) the full-time professional nature of representative positions means that workaholics (that is, less creative people than ideal) make it to the top (this is as true in business, unions and the ALP). Solving this problem needs more than political education, correctly identified as a necessity by some of your correspondents. It also requires: an end to the devaluation of learning, political structures which do not make political involvement unnecessarily time-consuming (the 'supply' side), and shorter working hours (the 'demand' side, so people have more time for doing a whole range of things including political activity).
2. While some have argued elsewhere that constitutional issues within the republic debate were beyond the capacity of ordinary Australians, these issues MUST be debated. For two reasons: constitutional change necessarily involves discussion of constitutional issues (see 3 below), and we must start with the presumption that ordinary Australians are intelligent enough to follow such a discussion if they have enough time to digest it, and the 'experts' and others put their views in plain English. I think the difference between intelligent and informed is significant; I have faith in the intelligence of the Australian community, but I doubt the extent to which intelligent people have the opportunity to properly deliberate and come to an informed decision.
3. Constitutional issue numero uno is that the head of state is not selected, but inherits their office. Therefore, any proposal to remove the monarch as head of state necessarily involves a discussion on the method of selection of its replacement, or even whether to replace the office at all. This discussion is constitutional: even a minor change, in a so-called minimalist model, changes our political system; and there are so many other possible changes that also need to be discussed. We should not shy away from a constitutional discussion, but place it at the head of future republic discussions. Secondly, note I say 'discussion' and not 'debate': if it's worth doing, it's worth doing well; we need a discussion so we can learn from each other's point of view and develop our own thinking, and this educative process must precede a debate. For example, the yes-team should have accepted the no-case concerns about the change to instant dismissal of the head of state as a (the! only?) valid criticism of the model, and deal with it intelligently (which would not have been too difficult). Debate not preceded by discussion contributes to confusion because protagonists campaign in absolute terms, and the yes-team is partly at fault here.
4. In this context, I am concerned that the yes-team did not appear to raise the main concern with a direct election model (and may, in the process, have swayed Ted Mack and Phil Cleary to campaign for a yes vote): a directly elected President could claim a mandate better than a government enjoying the confidence of the lower house. It is unclear how the issue might be resolved by the High Court if it fell to them for determination. We could have a constitutional crisis on our hands if, as happened in 1998, a majority of voters voted for one party for President but the other party had the numbers in the lower house: a Labor President might have claimed a mandate to block the GST legislation. Of course, I vigorously oppose the GST, but there is a higher issue concerning me: with representative democracy, an elected government should be able to implement its program subject only to its support in both houses of Parliament. If we are not happy with that idea, then we should either forget about a directly-president, or forget about representative democracy.
5. Finally, in terms of strategy we should do two things: first, follow advice similar to that offered by HAL the computer in 2001: if, after discussion and debate, it appears the people want a directly-elected President, then as republicans and democrats we should support such a system, work to put it in place, then let it fail so everyone will see what is wrong with it. Second, we should apply constitutional thinking to this issue of plebiscites and referenda. David Peetz said:
"To secure a republic, a two-stage process is essential. The first stage is a referendum (not a plebiscite, which has no constitutional effect) on the Republic. But its validity must be contingent on the second stage taking place: a referendum on direct election. While they could be held simultaneously, separating them would allow for proper scrutiny of the direct election model and avoid a merging of issues."
With the greatest respect to Dr Peetz, this analysis is flawed. The operation of s128 means that any referendum must be on a specific proposal outlining clear alterations to the actual wording of the constitution. Therefore, we cannot have a vote on the republic in general terms that would have any effect on the constitution. Any referendum must be after we have cleared up exactly what are the changes we want to make.
Here, a plebiscite is supremely useful, if it is about alternative models ONLY. A plebiscite only on the republic generally would set the cause back because people would see it for the waste of money that it is, and we cannot put alternatives in a referendum because the operation of section 128 does not contemplate a referendum in other than yes or no terms. The most useful form of a plebiscite would be if it followed a couple of years of public information and discussion, if voters had a wide variety of options to choose from, and (perhaps most important of all) the people could vote on the options in some sort of optional preferential way. Finally, even after such a plebiscite, we should foresee the possibility that the results may be so surprising that our leaders return to the discussion stage for further refinements of the popular models before getting anywhere near a referendum. Voting at a referendum on a direct-election model is by no stretch of the constitutional
imagination the logical next step in the inevitable move to a republic; but, having said that, I recognise that the mediocrity of current political leadership may be responsible for such a course, in which case I urge all sensible republicans to not do as the extremist direct-electionists did last time.
Sincerely
Jon Shapiro
(Jon Shapiro broadcasts on 89.7FM in Sydney's eastern suburbs, Fridays 4-6pm)
I am horrified by the proposed New Award "offered" to teachers and other educational professionals in the name of the NSW Labor Government by the Director-General, Dr Boston and the Minister, Mr Aquilina.
It sickens me that a Labor Government can produce an offer so reactionary and still claim to represent the poor and the disadvantaged in this community. The Award strikes at the heart of workers' entitlements, strikes at the role of the Union in its function of representing its members and attacks public school teachers and professionals directly.
In particular I am horrified that the new award has attacked the working conditions of school counsellors. For the addition of very little by recompense school counsellors have been asked to work an additional four extra weeks. They already work many more hours above their award, already must have completed additional post graduate qualifications and already work in stressful situations. To add to this appalling situation they are now asked to forgo three weeks leave for a pittance. The system will be the loser. Counsellors will not be attracted into the profession and those already there will leave in droves. The dire needs of many students for welfare support will not be fulfilled and we will all be the poorer.
Additional face-to-face teaching demands within the Award for teachers will also be harmful to education. I have taught in England under the conditions imposed by Thatcher when she conducted similar "reforms". The teaching was uninspirational and wooden in the extreme. No teachers had the time to develop effective resources or lessons and none had the desire to give more of their time. So much was lost of traditional teacher good will that the quality of education suffered for many years.
Politically I am even more horrified. NSW Labor relies so much on teacher members. Country branches are often dominated by teachers. They provide the organisational skills, the secretarial work load and the intellectual drive behind branches and SEC/FEC activities. To attack this group is so short-sighted that I can not countenance that such an award has the support of the Caucus.
I ask you to speak up against this Award in Caucus and seek to have the Premier intervene before Dr Boston and certain public servants do permanent damage to public education, the union movement, worker entitlements and the cause of the Labor Party that we both hold dear.
Yours faithfully
Brian Everingham
Dear Editor, please forgive me but did I read something along the lines of a union kicking up a stink about competitve tendering in NSW in the roads dept and local councils.
If im not mistaken there is a LABOR gov't in NSW isn't there??
As a member of the ALP in Vic ( yes a Mexican!!) you may or may not be aware that as policy we have or soon will have abolished compulsory competitive tendering( cct).
As the article suugests it DOES cost jobs in rural communities and destroys the local economy tranfferring job oppurtunities out of local areas to the city. I simply cant believe this is happening under a "labor" gov't.
Please, fellow unionists, make your government wake up to itself and get rid of cct. it's anti union, anti worker and anti rural communities. piss it off. we did have a bumper sticker here, "CCT- Destroying Rural Communities!!"
Ray Wilson, President, Victorian Country Labor Executive.
Dear Sir,
I note that in recent times readers of Workers Online have had the benefit of John Passant's musings on a number of issues, most recently, the alleged capitulation of the left over the issue of East Timor (issue 38). Those of us in the ACT have been exposed to Comrade Passant's writings for some time now so it is good to see that he is able to reach a broader audience via Workers Online.
I am no leftist, so writing this letter in defence of the so called "pro-war left" identified in Comrade Passant's article leaves me bemused to say the least. However,
leaving aside the cold war language so dear to his heart, what astounds in me is the complete lack of alternative courses of action in relation to the East Timor issue. What would he have Australia do? Nothing? Or perhaps supply arms to an outgunned and outnumbered guerilla movement, thus prolonging a conflict that has gone on to long already?
Comrade Passant does "those millions of decent Australians" a grave disservice if he is implying that they are so easily lead. Comrade Passant's problem is that the innate ability of the Australian people to distinguish what is right and just (such as intervention in East Timor), also allows them to see through the empty and morally bankrupt stance of Comrade Passant and his (few) supporters. Comrade Passant appears to suffer from "if they don't agree with me they must be stupid" syndrome that afflicts ideologues of all political persuasions. Australian unions and unionists and the Australian public should be proud of their stance over East Timor, while rejecting the hysterical conspiracy theories propagated in his article.
However, Comrade Passant is right about one thing. The left is dead, driven to irrelevancy from the inside by people such as him.
Sincerely,
Steve Ramsden
by Peter Lewis
Marc your main message today was that unions will ignore change at their peril. On a global scene how are we meeting that test?
It's a hard question. I don't think we are meeting it very well. In fact, I think if you look at unions as organisations - they are a dying breed. And if you look at companies that are going to be able to get through the electronic revolution, they are radically changing themselves. They are not the same kind of organisations that they were five years ago, and unions have to do the same thing. Except that we are entrenched in our traditions. We have traditions of doing things that we hold too dearly. We are going to have to change, because as I was saying this morning, there are groups of workers now - there are very few permanent groups of workers with the contracting out and such. We are going to have to find ways of finding those groups that coalesce around certain projects, which is why I raised the point of looking at the artists union just dying - so it seems to work for them.
On that point, unions, it seems to me, have recognised the threat of casualisation and the fragmented workforce, but their response has been to resist it . Is that the right response?
That is the first response. The first response of a trade union is always negative to changes. And rightly so, because when new technologies are introduced it is by employers. They are introduced with much hype and they are introduced with all positives. Because, why would you introduce anything that's not a positive. So our reaction as trade unionists is to say: "Hold on there are not - it is not all positive - and here are the negatives. And so we become a sort of debating partner in the conversation, holding the negative side. But then, as we hold the negative side, we internalise that negativity and we don't turn around and say: "Hey we better start looking at the positives as well."
In Australia particularly, we are having difficulty attracting younger workers. Is that an international trend?
Oh absolutely.
Do you think that negativity is the reason behind that?
I think we portray ourselves as industrial unions in an electronic age. We were designed during the industrial revolution. We have been kept together because of industrial organisation. We, in fact reflect the industrial way of organising. We reflect our employers. A lot of worker unions are big and huge because a lot of workers are big and huge.
But what's going to happen to us now when the employers change. Are we going to change in the way they do, becoming electronic unions, becoming unions that attract people when they coalesce in projects? Or are we going to die?
If you look at the statistics, we are a dying breed. The United States has a unionisation rate of maybe 10 per cent. If you take away the public employees, you're looking at five per cent of the private sector. The unionisation rate in the United Kingdom has dropped dramatically since 1980. The unionisation rate in Canada for some reason that I'm not so sure of, has remained stable at about 30 per cent of the big employed workforce. And they've been able to do that I think because there's something in the Canadian and the Australian mentalities that says: Yeah, beat them down but you can only beat them down so far, because we believe that they should be there. That's what we should be doing with all of them. And I think young people have to be introduced to that - with a different word - with a different vocabulary.
That we are NEW. That we adopt new technologies. That we use technologies in creative ways. That we do not tie people to particular classifications. As soon as you say that to a trade unionist you say: Oh my God! You can't get rid of the classification arrangement. Yet the classification rates - descriptions have disappeared. And so, we can do it. And I know we can do it because of the kind of trade of conversation that's happening at this conference.
If we take the position that, yes, we need to adapt from industrial age organisations to information age organisations, what would you say the three steps that could be taken now that would send you the message that yes, we are making that transition?
I would get some money together to promote some new messages. I would be starting to advertise in computer magazines saying: This is what we do. This is how we do it.
Secondly, I would start using some of the tools that the electronic/virtual companies are using to attract information. These companies attract information in many different ways. There are questions of privacy there that we have to debate on as unionists. But we can collect information on a whole bunch of people.
And then we have to start customising our information to members. Because people will not only say "That is a good thing to do - and of course you are doing that" because that's how they will be treated by everybody else in the world. And if they are not treated in customised information ways, by their unions, they won't - they'll think that the unions are not in play.
Of those three thing, I didn't hear you mention "access" and there is a big debate going on within the union movement in Australia at the moment. How important is access to the internet and what sort of responsibility should unions take in ensuring that access takes place?
Access is of course a huge discussion but whenever you talk with practitioners about access, it's always, always dividing up into two sections. It's the immediate access question, where access does not exist, so yes, we have to be taking very active positions in getting access, but in the back of that conversation always the realisation that access is going to become universal. It will become like the telephone, so everybody will get it. Now we have to start designing the world for it. Our world for that.
So should the union movement be tying itself to a commercial organisation to spread internet access amongst its membership? Is that a useful strategy?
It depends on a huge number of factors. What's the commercial outfit? Why are they involved? What do you get out of it? What is the advertising that is directed at it? But at the end of the day we have to find new ways of partnering so that we can get computers to working class people.
Tell me a bit about Soli-Net. You've been going for over 20 years. What changes have you seen in that time?
Last time I was in Australia was 1993. I had to define what a modem was. People looked at me very strangely. I was from a different world. People were very polite, but at the end of the conversation it was: He's talking fantasy. He's talking another world that we will never be a part of.
Now I come back, just six years later, and everybody knows, not only what a modem is, but how to use modems for creative trade union activities. Any one of the people in this conference could have stood at the front there and been a presenter of creative ways of using the technology. That's a huge difference that is.
And you are now working with the ILO to spread the technology into developing nations. How important is that for unions in places like Australia?
Australian unionists have to realise, as they do, and very well, that they may have problems but they are nothing compared to the problems being faced by unionists in developing countries where there is no possibility of access right now - and there is no infrastructure, so that we have to take extra steps so that we bring along our brothers and sisters in the international labour movement with us. Because there is as very, very strong possibility that we will divide the world further into information rich and information poor. And one of the ways that that can be done is to bring people to these kind of conferences and also to take the example of the Canadian auto workers: They have an international solidarity fund which is funded by a penny an hour fee to the auto workers, which goes into fund. Those kind of funds should be used for developing technology specific to developing countries.
I used to work until very recently only in the advanced electronic countries, and it was very interesting, but they are now coming along. What is not coming along are the unions in the under-developed world. Because the technology is not designed for that.
For instance, Soli-net, the conferencing system that I ran. There are many messages between the person's computer and the computer that serves out the messages. There's a lot of traffic. But that's OK in an advanced electronic country, where you fast connections. If you don't have these kind of fast connections - which is all of Africa, all of South America, South East Asia, then you are cut off. Now that's not the technology, that is a lack of will in designing the technology so that it meets their needs.
Now, of course the corporations in the United States are not going to design the technology for the poor people in South America, so that means it's up to us. So I want two things: I want messaging systems designed so that there is not a lot of traffic between the person's computer and the server. The server being the computer that passes out the message. That takes money to design. And I want innovative ways of developing technology. A crank up computer sounds funny, but we now have crank up radios, and I want a crank up computer that you crank it up and it gives you power for an hour and a half and when the satellite comes over once a day, you shoot your messages out and you take your messages down and you click off.
Nobody's designing that. Not because the technology doesn't allow us to do it, it is because there is a corporate mindset to the design of technology, which is why this morning I was arguing for more technology organisers. People like you and I that have some ability to understand these things and say technology can exist in different ways.
It's about almost looking at it as information - not just asa medium but also as a commodity and what we are looking at is new ways of delivering the information?
That's right. That's right. We have to find new ways of doing that if we are going to continue international solidarity we can't keep shipping people in. I work for the Workers Bureau of the United Nations International Labor Organisation, the ILO. Right now it's a fantastic programme. We take people from the developing world - unionists - and we bring them to the centre in Italy for a six weeks programme. These people work their hearts out because they don't have educational programmes where they are and they just stock up knowledge and demand more. But it's very limited. We can only bring together classes of 20 to 25 people at a time to teach them about international labour standards. Health and safety and such and so that's why the Workers Bureau of the ILO has higher meaning than others - to look at developing distance education programmes.
Tell us about the Online University - your master plan?
We are talking about an international labour university. Hopefully built by sharing credit and programmes between unions and colleges and universities around the world. The point to this is not only to build up recognition of international issues but to share responses to that so that we can learn from each other internationally how we can respond to globalisation, and build trade unions in that way. This is a topic that is a possibility but will remain only a possibility if we don't start acting on it.
But it's a move away from the notion of industrial age learning that's confined by national boundaries and also confined by national criteria?
Absolutely. That's it. And we've done it. I did it with SoliNet and you could see that it worked and you could see that the kinds of conversations that you have are radically different than when you have them within a boundary with a couple of international desks. When we have an international conference online we have people from many different countries, and it changes the conversation and its perception, and it changes the responses that are developed.
Is it merely involvement, or is there evaluation and marking involved as well?
If we are going to be serious about an international university, then we have to partner with the universities, learn how to develop very strict curriculum - by strict I mean you've written it out - you know what it is - you know where you are headed and what is the middle, the end and all the rest of it is, as well as learning to share credentials around each other.
Now, the problem that we have is that this concept is not only a radical one for the labour movement, it's a radical one for the university community itself. They don't share their credit, they don't do international work, and most of them are going to disappear if they don't get online anyway.
So, how far is this from becoming a reality?
The International Labour College? It's 10 years at least. I would predict five years before it starts teaching classes - ten years before it gets accepted around the world as a place to be, so that workers want to do it. But ten years in internet
Candidate: Bruce Penton
Bruce Penton joined the TWU as an Organiser in September 1998. Bruce had previously worked in the transport industry since leaving school back in 1958. He was a Delegate for ten years and had voluntarily served on the Union's Executive for over six years.
Despite his years of experience, from the day he first walked into the office as an Organiser Bruce has been the most enthusiastic, innovative and open-minded of unionists.
As an Organiser, Bruce covers a geographical region starting from the Northern Suburbs of Sydney up through the Central Coast to Wyong.
To highlight Bruce's effectiveness as an Organiser a brief look at three campaigns he has run over the past year demonstrates his range of skills, successes and initiatives.
Bus Industry
The private bus industry on the Central Coast was stagnant from a Union membership point of view. To tackle the problem Bruce set up a Regional Private Bus Committee. The Committee was comprised of Delegates and activists. The role of the Committee was not to address wages but localised, day-to-day issues.
The Committee developed a number of issues such as the lack of toilet facilities - on some runs both male and female drivers were forced to use bushland, and problems with bus access at railway stations. The committee coordinated campaigns in which activists held meetings with community groups and various levels of Government, developed and circulated petitions and conducted safety audits. As a result drivers now have access to keys and toilet facilities and structural changes have been made at some railway stations to improve access and parking for buses.
Membership in those bus yards has grown from between 6 to 60 percent and is now around 80 to 90 percent. Membership of casuals has grown from zero to 70%. The level of union activists has grown by almost 70%.
The additional Organising benefit of the Regional Committee was that it educated Delegates and activists about the importance of being involved. Under Bruce's guidance they took control and ownership of the issues and developed solutions. The membership is now much more active and enthusiastic about what they can achieve as part of the TWU team.
Waste industry
The TWU covers contracted waste collectors - garbos. As you can imagine there are a multitude of issues outside wages that would effect these guys. As an organising campaign Bruce got the members to focus on these concerns. The long list of issues they came up with included:
� Councils and contractors refusing to pay for Hepatitis B shots for workers; and
� Wyong Council providing residents with only one bin for both recycling and garbage which has led to almost daily abuse of workers as they can't pick up the bin if an apple core falls into the recycling section of the bin.
Again Bruce formed yard and industry committees to resolve the issues. In the case of the Hep B shots, Bruce and his team of activists went to the media and put direct pressure on the various Councils over their Duty of Care. The contractors have now provided the serum. This activity alone saw membership in one yard soar from 50% to 90% while in another it went from no membership to 95% overnight. At the same time the level of activism has again increased by about 70%.
With the issue of the single bin in Wyong, Bruce has coordinated the members and Delegates to get heavy local media attention. Members are currently walking the streets and visiting pubs and clubs with a customer survey on the issue.
Once again through initiative and resourcefulness Bruce has not only radically increased the membership he has activated them to take control of their issue and do something collectively about it.
Central Coast Convoy
The final campaign is not really a campaign at all, it's an event that gives a real insight into Bruce's character. While a TWU Delegate employed at Linfox Transport Bruce approached the TWU about starting a TWU truck convoy on the Central Coast to raise money for the Children's Ward at Gosford Hospital, the Child Abuse Prevention Society and Life Education.
Bruce coordinated activists to motivate much of the Central Coast community behind this very family-orientated activity. Media sponsorship and promotion, Council support and numerous approvals, Police and RTA permission, rides, stalls, entertainment and activities for families. In 1997 the TWU Central Coast Convoy had 100 trucks and raised $15,000. This year with Bruce still at the helm there were 210 trucks and over $36,000 was donated to the children's charities.
Not only is this a great community effort, Bruce has also used it as an organising tool. The Union gets headline local media coverage for months leading up to the event due to the media sponsorship arrangements that Bruce has negotiated. For the twelve months leading up to the convoy schools and sporting clubs run TWU Convoy raffles (the schools and clubs keep 50% of proceeds), effectively promoting the union amongst the children of the area.
These campaigns are just an insight into the work Bruce puts in. What they show is not only how hard he works but also how effectively he operates with activists, the community, non unionists and employers. Bruce focuses on issues-based organising which is essential to getting members actively involved in resolving their own problems and ultimately leads to greater membership levels. By encouraging activists and getting results Bruce has taken many of the issues beyond the workplace and into the wider community, making the Union an important focal and relevant part of society - something the union movement needs to achieve if we are to survive the challenges ahead.
by Lucy Taksa
The following are just a small sample of those that have been discovered during research into the history of the Eveleigh workshops.
Keep Pluggin'
Although the way be weary and No good conditions anywhere J. Kay, Eveleigh
Eveleigh Workers' Lament
We wash in dirty buckets, where germs abound galore,
Eveleigh News, 9 June 1954.
Poem from Munitions Annexe
Turning, Bending, List to the wheel, The screaming whirr A Woman Munitions Worker
Attention: All Historians (and fellow travellers)
Australian Society for the Study of Labor History Annual Dinner and Address will be held at the Staff Club, University of Sydney. 7.00 for 7.30pm on Friday November 26. Annual address from Hon Dr Meredith Burgmann, president NSW Legislative Council. Two course dinner $35 drinks additional, vegetarians catered for RSVP by Tuesday 23 November, mailto:[email protected] or phone: 9351 3786
by Margaret Gillespie
In order to protect your health and in some cases, you or your family's lives, you need to make sure that 'food safety cops' are on the beat and able to do their job on your behalf.
That's the simple, but effective message from US Whistleblower advocate, Tom Devine, who has just completed a visit to Australia to report on the public health risks associated with changes to Australia's meat export industry. The changes include the removal of most government meat inspectors, and their replacement with company inspectors. It's an industry that's worth an estimated $3.6 billion dollars, so any concerns from powerful American consumer groups needs to be taken seriously.
Tom Devine, is the legal director of the, 'Government Accountability Project', a US non profit legal advocacy firm, which deals exclusively with whistleblowing issues. GAP works with unions and interested consumer groups to defend whistleblowers in public and private employment to expose abuses of public trust. GAP's work includes exposing chemical companies for unlawful dumping of hazardous waste, violations of safety codes at nuclear plants, and unhealthy practices in meat and poultry processing plants. On his return to Washington, consumer organisations, victims of food poisoning groups, interested journalists, and US congress members, will be alerted to evidence gathered on his Australian trip which revealed, according to Tom, "symptoms of an unnecessary disaster that's about to happen."
During his visit to Australia, which was partly funded by the Community and Public Sector Union, Tom Devine, gathered evidence in the company regulated domestic sector from Australian whistleblowers, many of whom are ex-government meat inspectors and retired members of the CPSU.
Their reports, according to Tom, include instances where up to 75 percent of carcases on some production lines being contaminated with faeces and bile, workers walking through 'puddles of bloody faecal soup' tracking over production lines where meat was being dressed for consumption. Blocked drains resulting from pools of faeces, blood and other filth that was too caked to hose away. Workplaces where the equipment was no longer wiped down daily resulting in build ups of fat and spoiled and rotting meat, blood, grease and other contaminants. Greenish black moss growing on the walls when companies stopped cleaning regularly.
"The bottom line for me is that the threat to public health is much more severe than I'd anticipated after coming over from the States," Tom claims. "When I came I was irritated that a government spokesperson wasn't playing it straight with American consumers. I have spoken to over a dozen whistleblowers here during the trip from a variety of backgrounds, but the most significant were former government inspectors who went to work for companies under the domestic self inspection programs and their experiences were far worse than anything expected before arriving."
"It's not surprising after hearing these whistleblowers stories to see that the salmonella rate is going up domestically in Australia."
The evidence collected by Tom Devine on what has happened at domestic abbattoirs together with the flaws in the proposed trial of minimal government inspected beef to the States he believes combine to pose an indefensible risk to US consumers.
To date no Australian export licensed abattoir has gone onto the new deregulated system. In the meantime the Community and Public Sector Union intends to continue its campaign to alert key industry members of the risks associated with the government's 'honesty' system for export meat inspection.
The Government Accountability Project website address is: http://www.whistleblower.org
by Allen Myers
"It has ditched generations of principled opposition to Australian militarism in an instant. It has embraced US imperialism overnight. It has supported more arms spending. And in the stampede to the right the left has embraced the league of robber nations, the UN."
The first question that arises regarding this impassioned oratory is: who does Passant think he's writing about? And why is he incapable of sharing that information with his readers?
Which leftists, for example, have embraced US imperialism for even a few minutes, let alone overnight? Perhaps by "left" he means the left of the ALP? But no, the ALP is in the permanent embrace of US imperialism, and one could not credit it with generations of principled opposition to Australian militarism.
Similarly, what left organisation has supported more military spending? Who has embraced the UN along with the US?
The vagueness appears to be deliberate. If Passant named names, it would be possible for readers to compare reality with his accusations and thus discover how thin the latter are.
This sort of bad faith is evident also in statements like, "Not one leftist of any authority has queried the official line that we are in East Timor to save the people". What's the bet that when you point out leftists who have not merely queried the line but actively debunked it, Passant will reply that they aren't "of any authority" (whatever that means)?
However, something more seems to be at work here as well. It's as if Passant has convinced himself that "the left" must have done all these things, because they are a logical corollary of having "capitulated". Unfortunately, he never considers this the other way around: if the left isn't really calling for increased military spending or acting as charged, perhaps it's because calling for intervention was not a capitulation.
Passant appears not to have thought very deeply about his long series of questions. For example:
"Where are the voices querying the figures on the slaughter in East Timor, suggesting that the Australian media and Government may have exaggerated the numbers to create a pro-intervention climate in Australia?"
The answer to that is obvious to anyone who has followed the events: those voices are in the Indonesian military and government and the media controlled by them.
The notion that the Howard government sought pretexts to intervene doesn't become any less ludicrous when it's repeated by an "antiwar socialist".
Australian governments for 25 years have sought pretexts to treat East Timor as an "Indonesian internal affair" and to maintain their alliance with the Indonesian military. Far from seeking "to create a pro-intervention climate", Howard tried to resist the demands for intervention, saying that it would cause a "war" with Indonesia. It was not until September 10, six days after Indonesian troops and militias dramatically escalated the slaughter, that the government made even a token gesture of disapproval, by cancelling three joint military exercises.
Even after the B.J. Habibie government agreed to an international force, Howard delayed as long as possible. In the week following September 4, Defence Department spokespeople were quoted in the media as saying that Australian forces could be in East Timor on "24 hours' notice". After the agreement on intervention, it took eight days for the first Australian troops to arrive.
In short, both the evidence and political logic show that the intervention was a defeat for Howard. It was forced on him by the mass support for East Timor and the huge protests in Australian cities. But Passant again turns reality upside down:
"Clearly East Timor has been a domestic political success for John Howard. By allowing this, and supporting it, the pro-war left has demonstrated its bankruptcy."
Again, the exaggerated language is designed to mask the weakness of the argument. There has been no "pro-war left" on this issue. Before Passant, the only people who claimed to have discerned one were members of the Howard government. It might also be noted that if Howard, the left or anyone else was in favour of a war in East Timor involving Western troops, they have done rather badly: there hasn't been one.
Immediately after the above passage about Howard's "political success", Passant continues:
"And yet something else is happening in Australia. Despite Howard's supremacy on the East Timor issue, the polls haven't shown a major swing to the Coalition."
This admission of course debunks Passant's claim of a "stampede to the right". The lack of a swing to the Coalition is no great mystery. By and large, the public has been made aware-thanks largely to the left that Passant disparages-of the Howard government's real attitude and record on East Timor. The intervention is seen, correctly, as something Howard was forced to do, and he is therefore given little credit for it.
It would be nice to think that Howard might experience many more such "successes". But it is not likely if the left follows the political prescriptions of John Passant.
Allen Myers is a member of the MEAA and DSP
by Noel Hester
What will be the emphasis of the new CTU leadership ?
We are unashamedly moving to an organising focus based on the urgent need to re-unionise the country. Union membership is at 20% - probably lower than that realistically speaking - and simply we don't have enough members.
In concrete terms, what are you going to do?
The central organisation has to play a leadership role as unions make the adjustments to an organising focus. And it has to act as a catalyst for that change. Now the catalyst part goes to issues around education and training. Helping unions internally to make those changes. Trying to get unions to work together on re-unionisation projects and very definitely to try and get some campaigning going again. I mean this government is still trying to get up legislation to do away with holidays and to tighten up - even more - employment contracts.
That was defeated on the ground through a very successful campaign which largely arose out of the activities of the unions themselves, rather than being led from the center. Now the CTU should be able to quickly resource and facilitate that - so we've got a whole lot of campaigning. Even if there is a change of government there still has to be a strong, independent voice of trade unions.
We've heard a lot about the disastrous consequences of the ECA, has there been anything positive to come out of that time?
It's bloody hard to think of any! I think one of the positives is that to a large extent workers have reclaimed the unions. The Employment Contracts Act has removed compulsory membership, removed the boundaries that unions had to keep by law of coverage, removed automatic bargaining rights, and enforced the ratification process on unions. Workers now feel a lot more confident about their ownership of their union, about bargaining and a whole lot of things have been brought a lot closer to the membership. So, workers where they are in unions feel a lot closer to the unions and feel they own them a lot more. That's one good thing.
Another - and this could have happened without the legislation, but it's forced the unions to be very clear about what it is they are doing. I mean, we've had to get rid of the bullshit because we can't afford it. Large elements of bureaucracy and featherbedding have gone and the resources are now very keenly focussed in the areas - or are starting to be - that really matter. So I think, I mean it's a shocking way to get to that end - but in a number of unions that has occurred, and indeed in my own union, FinSec we've re-worked the way we look at and do things.
How has FinSec survived in such a hostile climate?
We reduced everything down to some very simple propositions. We decided that our business was initially in negotiating people's contracts.
We identified what was our core business - which is banks and insurance companies.
We decided that we needed to be relevant at three levels: the workplace, the enterprise and the industry. So we unashamedly put resources into being an active participant at each of those three levels.
That was the first set of changes. The next set of changes was we moved to restructure ourselves internally in terms of elected structure and roles of paid and elected officials. We went back to an organising focus and I think we've been very successful in that.
Do you think there has been a sea change in attitudes to unions in New Zealand?
I think there has. And I think it's interesting that since her election Shipley has set out to bash unions. Their legislation is designed to get rid of unions, and in fact they are now attempting to hang onto power by bashing unions.
I think what that has done is put unions back on the agenda and I think that people do see a legitimate role for unions. I mean, things got so bad that there's almost like a new legitimacy that is emerging or has the potential to emerge around what unions are and what they stand for. What we have to do with the change of government is to capture that legitimacy or that view and somehow not squander it and actually build on it. It's about building on that view that we are relevant to someone's son or daughter when they first start in the workplace.
What sort of importance has Industrial Relations in the current election campaign?
A very important role, because it's one of the areas where there is a clear distinction between the Right and the Left. The Right wants to make the Employment Contracts Act even worse. The Left, or Centre Left promotes collective bargaining and promotes the role of the union.
There's an absolutely clear distinction and of course the major funders of the Right, the bosses, that's what they are really scared about. So of course they are putting a lot of money and time and effort into beating up their side.
The Herald published a study which asked employers what impact will getting rid of the ECA have on your business. In fact, the majority of employers themselves said it will have little impact. So putting aside all the bullshit of the Employers Federation - underneath them the majority don't actually seem to be that worried.
What is the union movement expecting of a coalition made up of Labor and the Alliance and will they deliver?
They've got to get rid of the ECA. It's really important that there is a package of changes which are broader than just industrial relations which are about getting the country back on the rails again. What does that mean? It means proper industry development policies. All those sorts of things have to work together.
What's your vision for the New Zealand trade union movement?
What Ross Wilson and I and Darien Fenton want to see is a bigger union movement that's more grumpy with government and employers around programmes that are achievable.
On Foundation Day at Adelaide University in 1977, a secretive group of students hatched a plan to play the greatest prank in the history of Australian politics.
Today, all was revealed in a packed press conference when after more than 20 years in hiding, Jason Ho, Anne Eastlight and Michael Riley finally explained the truth behind the formation of the political party that would become known as the Australian Democrats.
In a bizarre plan hatched over more than two decades and reading like "The Dismissal" meets "Weekend at Bernie's", the students used foam rubber puppets to pretend to be real politicians, fooling voters, party members and politician opponents alike. Citing "professional differences" and the need to move onto other projects, the three former students have revealed themselves, pulling the plug on Australia's longest running political hoax.
"We never dreamed it would go so far" marvelled Ho, now 38 years old, who has spent more than half his life maintaining the fa�ade that the leadership of the Australian Democrats actually existed. ""Mike knew about puppets, and Anne was a really good mimic, so we thought - how about making some animatronic politicians and forming a new party? At first we thought people would cotton on straight away. I mean, check out this hand movement - it's totally unrealistic" Ho scoffed as he demonstrated the foam-rubber 'Don Chipp' puppet used by the trio as the party's founding patriarch.
"But the people in the New Liberal Movement and the Australia Party [both of which joined the newly formed Democrats and swelled its membership] seemed to take it all so seriously. We didn't want to back out, we wanted to see how far we could continue the prank. By the time Robin [Millhouse, the first Democrat to hold a Parliamentary seat] won her by-election, we were pretty much working full-time, just to keep people believing that there really was a 'Don Chipp'. Don's hard to do well ... when we first thought up the idea for him, it sounded like a sick joke, but it kind of worked, I guess. After Don, the others were easier - not many of them were required to exhibit much personality - but I think Janine was definitely the toughest. Her frowns and disappointed shakes of the head alone would make your hands ache after a few hours. It sounds like light-hearted fun ... but it was also hard work!"
With the election in December 1977 of the first Democrat Senator, Janine Haines, the three students realised that they would face a real challenge with just three pairs of hands to keep the puppets moving, living and acting realistically. "It's difficult for three people to do everything that needs to be done to keep alive the illusion of multiple sitting parliamentarians, particularly when they aren't all in the same city. Sure, we had some gaffes. One time, Mike left the Janine Haines puppet sitting in the back of a Parliamentary Sub-Committee for a week, but luckily no-one noticed."
As the fictional "party" grew in numbers and stature, more work was required to maintain the illusion. "Writing the aims of the party was really fun" recalls Riley. "I thought up the bit about 'seeking the transition to a sustainable economy' and 'accepting the challenges of the predicament of humanity'. It was silly, but kind of fun. We just got really baked and thought of the craziest stuff we could, plus whacked in some material cribbed from old politics essays by Robert Manne. Of course, we had to trim it a bit ... in the first draft, there was an objective to 'boldly go where no man has gone before', and a thing about conscripting young people to work on a national tram project, which would have been cool to leave in."
The puppets, developed by the students and operated to create the illusion of fictional politicians who could shake hands, kiss babies and win office, are controlled from within by a cunningly concealed system of levers and pulleys. The operator, who must work alone and in moist, dark conditions within the foam-rubber prison, cannot see out directly but relies instead on a patented design 'Polli-scope' which extends from the puppet's "nose". To make the puppet walk, deliver first reading speeches and Parliamentary questions, cut ribbons or do any of the other countless tasks that a sitting politician must do, the operator pulls strings or levers to move parts of the puppet's body.
Although they have fond memories of those heady first few years, the trio have no doubt about their finest hour. "Cheryl Kernot, hands down" they all agree, when asked what part of the deception they most enjoyed. "We seriously felt like we had a chance at national government with Cheryl. That would have been cool - we could have unmasked ourselves at the height of our powers, like in 'Tootsie'. But, no matter, we still had some fun with her. You know the bit where she had that showdown with Bronwyn Bishop, and her lip started to, y'know, get this facial twitch, like a tic? It looks like she's really angry or overcome by emotion. Actually, I got the meanest attack of the giggles. Every time Bronwyn got angrier, she's look over at Richo, the chairman of the Parliamentary sub-committee, to see if he would weigh in, and he would pretend not to notice, or scratch himself, or just ignore her. Bronwyn was apoplectic, beehive a-quiver, and the others struggled for composure ... I was just losing it."
The pranksters also revealed how 'Ms Kernot's' apparent defection to the ALP was engineered. "Basically, you can't wear the Cheryl suit all the time. You have to get out to go to the bathroom. So, one time when I was taking a break, this little bastard ALP staffer stole the suit. We were pretty bitter at first - it takes a lot of effort to develop a Democrat puppet from scratch, but we just had to move on. I don't know who is operating Cheryl now, but when I see the footage on TV, I can't say that her movements and demeanour look terribly realistic."
The three students were unapologetic to the thousands of Australians who are currently card-carrying members of the Australian Democrats. "We didn't mean to lie, or dupe people ... we just wanted to have a bit of fun, y'know? If people fell for our prank, well, so be it. They should cop it on the chin and move on. I mean, seriously - John Coulter? Is that real? Does that fool you for a second, when you know that he's a puppet? Of course not. It wasn't our deception - the voters deceived themselves."
by Paul Howes
Channel Nine describes its new show as "an exciting program that celebrates the greatest movers and shakers, moments and memories of the past 100 years."
The show involves a "panel of experts" who rate the best TV program of the Century (which is inevitably linked to Channel Nine), the best band or singer of the century (could be Johnny Franham or maybe Cold Chisel), or the best movie.
Simply the Best" is about as exciting as the "The Best of Hey Hey its Saturday" but its only one of many programs, articles, books and forums which focus on rating the events and people of the last century and Millennium as we approach December 31, 1999.
So why do we have this fixation on rating and reviewing everything that ever happened?
The New York Times Magazine is currently reviewing the entire millennium in search of the best of everything. Frank Rich a senior writer for New York Times Magazine claims:
"The impulse behind this listing and cataloguing of the best is all too understandable at our particular fin de siecle. We live in a time when the volume of what we know about our universe is more than we can absorb, and among our millennial anxieties is the desperate wish to sort it out. The Asia that The Times barely acknowledged a hundred years ago, as well as all the other non-Western sites on the planet, have long since been annexed to our field of vision in the intervening decades. So have the moon and the atom. And that's not the half of it."
But does any one really care? Is the millennium over rated? There seems to be this expectation that time will stop at midnight December 31 1999 and at 12.01 am on January 1 2001 the world will be a different place hence the need to review and rate all of the events of the past 1000 years. But as everyone knows nothing will change the world will still be here, life will be the same and at the risk of sounding cynical the only difference will be a few computer systems in Azerbaijan will collapse due them not being Y2K compliant.
by Neal Towart
Inequality and Unemployment in Europe: the American Cure by James K. Galbraith, Pedro Concei��o & Pedro Ferreira
The European social market is often depicted as a humane alternative to the terminal welfare policies of the USA. This article argues that the rhetoric of US capital in this field, as with its free market rhetoric, is intended for external consumption, and is not a clear picture of US inequality. The authors don't argue that the US model is superior to Germany or Scandinavia, but that if Europe is taken as a single economy (the aim of the European Union) then US welfare and distribution of income stands up pretty well in contrast to Spain, Italy, Greece. The role of the state is seen to be crucial in this, with the record growth in the US economy in recent years having a more positive impact on reduction in inequality than it might appear. The authors however, don't extend the logic of their argument to include Canada and Mexico, as that single market surely should be the comparison with the EU. I'm sure the people of Chiapas would have a few dissenting thoughts about the benefits of the US model.
That said, the force of the argument backs that of Krueger and Card on the minimum wage. That is a higher minimum wage reduces unemployment: "inequality in wage structures and unemployment are related: when one goes up, so does the other". The authors argue that a true European welfare state requires an earned income tax credit scheme, as a means of topping up low wages. Wage inequality is greater in the US than in some European countries, but in comparison with an integrated Europe, they are more equal.
Countries in Europe with the most generous social welfare policies have the lowest unemployment. The Right claim that generous welfare systems create disincentives to work. The facts show this to be incorrect. High wage countries are those with generous welfare systems and a diversity of employment types, ranging from highly skilled work to low productivity jobs. The employment structure is more complex than in low wage countries. These factors operate because of the wealth transfer systems which subsidize the incomes of the lower paid by providing a strong public sector, "free" health care and a sound education system. This needs to be extended across Europe.
The authors argue that the US achievement in the 1990s could be a model for a Europe wide attack on inequality. It seems to me that the better approach would be to extend the examples of Denmark, Germany, Sweden and Finland across the EU. They would argue that nationalistic concerns prevent this happening but don't acknowledge the extent to which massive subsidies already flow across borders in the EU. These flows are driven by concerns other than those of redistribution of wealth, but can have that effect. The mechanism is in place; the political will to address European wide inequality is not.
The will to address worldwide inequality (is that Africa on the map just south of the Mediterranean?) is further away, and articles like this lauding the US wealth creation achievement without acknowledging the massive subsidy of the first world by the third further distract attention from the problem.
(New Left Review; no. 237, September/October 1999)
Workplace Equity & Discrimination in the New Millenium Edited by Don McKenzie
The National Key Centre in Industrial Relations (NKCIR) has collected the papers from this conference held in June 1999. The three major questions addressed by the speakers were:
- What have we learnt from the experience of state and federal anti-discrimination laws?
- What are the issues concerning equity and discrimination that workplaces will face in the new millenium?
- What practical steps are available to organisations to deal with issues of equity and discrimination
(NKCIR monograph no. 13, 1999)
Rio Tinto - a Radical Decision? by Jeff Shaw, QC, MLC
The AIRC took a risky venture into literary illusion recently when it applied the nineteenth century proverb "all is fair in love and war" to the industrial warfare that it perceived in the background events to the Rio Tinto case.
The CFMEU made its way through the labyrinthine obstacles to arbitration created by the Workplace Relations Act (in contrast to the appearance given by the government and the media that the union was creating obstacles). The full bench took the decision to arbitrate but then chose to do so in a minimalist manner, without scrutinising the various claims of the parties in any detail. This minimalist approach was not a requirement of the legislation, in fact the AIRC was bound to consider "the merits of the case". By choosing to take a global approach and declaring that unilateral changes were necessary because the unions "chose to engage in warfare" and the company was entitled to fight back, they may have altered the perceptions in industrial relations that agitation to gain a third party hearing no longer has utility. They seem to have declared that there are no standards of fair play. Despite the allusion to war in their quotation, wars do in fact have rules and conventions, whilst the AIRC seems in danger of abandoning them.
(Australian Industrial Law Update; newsletter 10, 29 October 1999)
Freedom of Association: Penalty for Anti-Unionism
The Federal Court has fined a manufacturing company whose managing director made anti-union speeches to its workers and threatened to dismiss toolmakers if they joined a union. The AMWU alleged that DMG Industries breached Part XA of the Workplace relations Act. The company conceded it had breached s298K of the Act and agrred to reimburse the union for its costs and agreed to provide written undertakings against such action in the future.
AFMEPKIU V DMG Industries Pty Ltd, Fed Ct (Marshall J), 2 June 1999, (1999) 46 AILR 4-095. (Australian Industrial Law Update; newsletter 10, 29 October 1999)
The Cost to Australia of Early School-Leaving by Anthony King
Australia still has relatively low levels of secondary school completion. The estimated lifetime cost (discounted to 1999 terms) to the country is $74,000.00 for each early leaver (numbers estimated at 35,000 per year).
(The Cost to Australia of Early School-Leaving. Report commissioned by the Dusseldorp Skills Forum; prepared by Anthony King, National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling (NATSEM), University of Canberra, 1999)
Why Australia Needs a National Youth Commitment by John Spierings
In 1998 there were 114,000 Australian teenagers not in education or training, who were either unemployed or not in the labour force. 80,000 of these young people were early school leavers. Many other young people were scraping along in precarious employment. Policy needs to focus on encouraging them to stay at school, and to support them in the world outside if they chose to leave school.
Early school leavers should be entitled to access to a minimum level of post-compulsory education and training which could be put together from schools, TAFES and other providers of accreditted training.
(Why Australia Needs a National Youth Commitment: A Discussion Paper by John Spierings. Ultimo: Dusseldorp Skills Forum 1999)
Thousands of teachers boo-ed the alleged Labor Minister, as he continued to back in bureaucrats appointed by the Greiner Government as they lock horns with the teachers elected representatives. In a first for the Carr Government, Aquilina allowed his bureaucrats to bypass the union to offer a bodgy pay deal direct to teachers - bogging down the Internet and clogging up their mail boxes. His slimy attempts to assume the high moral ground by denigrating the teachers and the public education system will do damage to the profession way beyond the current dispute. And his liberal use of the truth of the content of the pay claim, would surely get him an 'F' for honesty. Worse, he has appeared to co-ordinate his campaign with that friend of the workers the Daily Telegraph - obviously forgetting the age-old truism: if you lie down with dogs, you're sure to get fleas. He's used the Net for his purposes, now it's your turn. See if you can't transform him into the caring, sharing friend of education that we all know lies deep within him.
Unions
Organising With A Mission
History
Rhyme and Reason
The going very rough,
And work conditions in your shop
Are getting rather tough;
Don't let your spirit be cast down
But try with all your might
To get your mates from everywhere
To fight, fight, fight.
Were given without strife,
So you must guard what you have got,
Just as you would your life;
For sure as day is followed by
The darkness of the night,
We know the dawn will break for us,
So fight, fight, fight.
The Railroad, 2 June 1936, page 4.
We cram our clothes in lockers 50 years of age or more,
For years we've fought & struggled for real amenities,
But according to the Rail Heads, they're liabilities.
Workers needs can't be considered,
If the Boss can improvise,
So the Rail Heads constant, years old cry,
Is "can't be done --- no use to try
Confound, the men's conditions we must economise.
Shell up-ending,
Clamp it tight,
Lever right,
Press the knob,
Watch the job-
Sliver and blue
Come to view,
Ribbins of Steel!
Hark to the Brake
Ready to take
Yet another shell
Know all is well
Australian man!
Thus our plan-
From dusk to dawn
Munitions form.
And eager burr;
A coo-ee clear
To you, my dear!
Rythmic machines,
Send potent means
To help you fight.
'Tis woman's mite
Of toil and tears.
The Railroad, 30 March 1943, page 6.
Health
The Food Police
Politics
East Timor: Defeat or Victory for the Left?
International
Kiwi Unions Rebuild from Ground Up
Satire
Australian Democrats Revealed as Student Hoax
Review
The Best of the Best
Labour Review
What's New at the Information Centre
Deface a Face
25,000 Teachers Can�t Be Wrong!
We are likely to use it to access any type of information, anywhere, at anytime. Use it to stay "in the loop" and stay in touch with significant others all the time. Use it to send and receive messages in and all languages, as if our own. Use it to surf the Internet and Web with the stress-less help of "smart" software (Intelligent Agents) that provide useful information even before we ask for it. And, feel empowered by these information aids as never before!
Intelligent Agents, as pieces of software dedicated to studying us and serving us in cyberspace, resemble nothing so much as a weird combination of British butler, Asian Mandarin, Scotland Yard detective, and doting maiden aunt. We can each compose our own (housed in the "wearable" on our wrist) by agreeing for the rest of our lives to answer honestly its each and every question about us, the answers to which it will be programmed to use to creatively build a profile that may eventually tell it more about us than we probably know ourselves.
At the outset we will probably be dazzled, and enormously empowered. Whether or not we will get increasingly comfortable with our newfound dependence on them to advance our cause in cyberspace -to get us the best buys, to help us chose the best candidate, to guide our decision about whether to vote for or against a union drive - remains to be seen.
One of the major benficiaries of this computer use renaissance, this ubiquitous presence of computers -as-wearables, and our new "partnership" with Intelligent Agents, may be a revived Labor Movement, for even as the Millennium Year progressed, savy union activists moved to take full advantage of computer potentialities.
For example, smart unions are already busy creating interactive, rather than static Web sites. They intend to invite prospective members to use e-mail to send them tough questions the union can answer in public for all doubters to read. Their Web sites will feature typical contract clauses, the better to advertise concretely what organizing can help workers secure. They will highlight recent success stories of how being a unionized workplace actually helped an employer improve his or her bottom-line, thereby bolstering the chances the workers involved would continue to have a payroll. And they study one another's Web site so as to adapt American and overseas innovations continously and increasingly offered in cyberspace.
Reinvented now as a "CyberUnion," these 21st century labor organizations will be able - for the first time ever - to match the formidable progress business makes with computer applications, thereby showing an appreciative membership that these modern unions proudly "compute."
Imagine the difference this could make when added to the newfound ability of the average worker to learn nearly anything, anytime, anywhere merely by asking it of an Intelligent Agent housed in the computer worn on one's wrist. It is not to hard to forecast the emergence of a workforce, CyberUnion member and non-union member alike, more inquisitive and zesty than any in modern history. It is likely to re-write the rules about what can, should, and ought to be known by average blokes and ladies. It may force a redefinition of power and priviledge in the workplace and in the labor union - to the likely benefit of both.
Above all, the imminent arrival of ubiquitous PC-plus (or post-PC) computing makes it likely work in 2005 will have far less in common with the 20th century than many of us may be comfortable with. CyberUnions, Intelligent Agents, and virtual damn-near-everything promise one hellova turbulent time. It should be invigorating and memorable, provided we take care to care about one another. Intelligent Agents, for all of their intellectual prowess, are not likely to give a damn about whether we care for one another ... that soul-saving responsibility will always be especially ours, and all the more so in a Chrome-like 21st century.
Arthur B. Shostak is a Professor of Industrial Sociology, and the Director of the Center for Employment Futures, at Drexel University,Phil. PA. His 19th book, CyberUnion: Empowering Labor through Computer Technology, was published by M.E. Sharpe in July, 1999.
AAP reported that Drug -testing has reached a cerebral corner of the sports world: Chess.
A small sample of players at a Spanish team championship tournament under way on the Mediterranean island of Menorca on Sunday were stunned to learn that they had to provide a urine sample under doctor's supervision, the daily El Mundo newspaper said.
The Spanish Chess Federation said it was acting on orders from the government body that oversees sports in Spain and regularly submits athletes to spot checks for use on banned performance-enhancing substances.
In this case, doctors were looking for traces of amphetamines, tranquilisers, and heart medicines called beta blockers and other drugs that are also banned in physically strenuous sports.
Physically strenuous ??
**************
How's this for a great story to come out of New Zealand in the world of harness racing.
Jo Herbert drive her 100th winner yesterday at the Tuapeka meeting and made the occasion memorable by figuring in a dead heat with her boy friend mark Jones.
It was the first dead heat for both drivers.
What a way to bring up your century of wins.
The headline in the Otago Daily Times was clever too: "100 wins - Pair Inseparable"
********************
Glen McGrath took time out to talk to Trenty and I early on Friday morning just ahead of taking on the Pakistan side for day two of the test in Hobart.
McGrath had a great day with the ball that started early with dismissal of Saeed Anwar for a duck.
Australia was immediately on top with the score at 1 for 4 and eventually wrapped up the visitors for 222 all out.
McGrath took two wickets for 34 runs and went past Richie Benaud's test wicket taking mark of 248.
McGath started day two with a sensational mark of 250 test wickets under his belt.
Greg Radley presents breakfast on 2KY weekday mornings
by Mark Lennon
National savings are the financial resources that a country has available for investment in areas such as infrastructure, capital equipment, and venture projects. It includes both private sector and public sector savings. Public sector savings come in the form of Government budget surpluses. Private sector savings are those held by companies and us, the general public, in bank accounts and the like.
The importance of having a high level of national saving is one of economic sovereignty. If there are insufficient levels of saving within our borders then companies have to look overseas for investment funds. Whilst this is a normal practice, all nations borrow overseas, it is the level of foreign investment that is the cause for concern. Having high levels of foreign debt leaves our economy vulnerable during times of economic downturn. It also means that as our level of foreign debt increases foreign lenders will be asking us to pay higher interest rates as they consider Australia an increasing risk.
Certainly Australia's record in the area of national savings has not been great. We have tended to have high levels of foreign debt. In the public sector Governments have sought in recent times to address this problem by moving budgets into surplus. (Though at the cost of decent public services, it is argued.) At the micro level, however the trend has been in the opposite direction with us now having one of the lowest household savings rates in the OECD. Our rate of household savings has dropped from 11% of household income in the 1970s to under 2% now.
Improving the level of household superannuation savings therefore is important if we are to lift the level of national savings thus providing a larger domestic source of investment funds.
Certainly the introduction of the Superannuation Savings Guarantee has achieved the goal of lifting the level of household savings held in superannuation. Superannuation now makes up some 20% of households savings, second only to the family home. However, it remains to be seen if there has been an increase in net household saving . It may be that superannuation has simply replaced other forms of household saving.
Despite this, the fact that their is now some $380 billion invested in superannuation funds in Australia would indicate that when it comes to national savings we appear to be heading in the right direction, but it is a topic that should be revisited next year.
As True a former builder who now does special projects for the CFMEU, points out, the Daily Telegraph in particular has opposed every union campaign in support of their members for the past 150 years.
The 47 page booklet is the first publication in the Wal Liddle Series, in honour of a CFMEU rank and file activist who bequest $30,000 to the CFMEU for workers education before dying from mesothelioma.
On a day when the Daily Telegraph ran a vintage "No Class" headline to berate striking teachers, we reproduce some extracts from True's book:
The 44-hour week - The Daily Telegraph declared that housewives would have to pay for it and in the increasingly hysterical tone that was to become the paper's trademark, "...it is simply a question of the life or death of our industries."(1926)
The 40-hour week - told workers it would lead to "... a considerable fall in your standards of living" and that "... the house you have been looking forward to" will be "beyond your reach". (1947).
The 35-hour week - it would "...deal a mortal blow to every council, municipality and shire in the State." (1960)
Union badges - "... the latest devised instrument of unionistic aggressiveness against liberty." ... "it typifies the kind of tyranny to be expected under socialism" (1940).
Workers Compensation - Described by a Telegraph editorial as "A spurious political bribe" - "The 'Workers Employment Prevention Act' would be a more accurate title for it ... employers will be compelled to reduce hands wherever they can, with the result that many men will be thrown out of work. And in the industries that do survive .. it is the public who will ultimately have to pay the premium." (1926).
Long Service Leave The Daily Mirror under the title "How to Build an Empire Without Footing the Cost" declared the scheme "a scandalous waste of money" (1978)
Green Bans Telegraph editorial titles "seeing Red Over Green Bans" - "we are totally fed up with being dictated to" ... "let Mr Mundey and his merry men look after the affairs of their union and stop meddling in the running of this State." (1973)
Child Endowment Under an editorial titled "Political Robbery With violence" it called the reform an ." outrage upon the people" .. "the country is compelled to dive into industrial and financial chaos, the depth of which cannot be known until the bottom is reached."
****************
While True's book looks at all the papers, it is the Telegraph masthead which has always led the way in vilifying workers - whether under the ownership of Packer or Murdoch.
It's a tradition that continues to today. "For all it's 21st Century rhetoric, its attitudes to unions is essentially a direct throwback to the 1840s," True writes.
"The Telegraph likes you fine if you have a 'yes sir, no sir, three bags full sir' attitude and accept whatever pay and conditions the boss sees fit to pay you - but if you stand up for yourself - well that's another matter!"
As he said at the book's launch in Trades Hall this week - "The Telegraph should have a disclaimer under its banner - 'in the interests of big business in particular and the Murdoch empire in particular."
So next time Piers gets under your skin, just remember he's merely a player in a much bigger drama that has been playing for some 160 years.
Copies of "It must be true ... it's in the papers!" are available from the Union Shop, 377 Sussex Street, Sydney
© 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/40/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 |