by Andrew Casey
"It is obvious that they are bowing to pressure (from George Speight) but I don't see why they have to harass and intimidate honest law-abiding citizens of this country," Felix Anthony said on Friday after he was released.
As the military grabbed him and shunted him to a military barracks some of his union members at Fiji's crucial Rarawai Mill were locked into their workplace by military officers and ordered to work.
At the time of going to press we were waiting for news about what happened to these workers at the end of their normal shift at 3pm ( Fiji time). However all attempts at telephone contacts with union officials in Fiji failed.
The general-manager of the Mill, Mr Graham Wade, denied any workers had been locked in by the military.He did say however that there was a very strong military presence near and around the workplace for 'security reasons'.
Several hundred mill workers had already walked off their job at the Rarawai Mill, the biggest sugar mill in the country, because of insufficient cane.
But, Felix Anthony said: "some were caught inside the mill by the military who then locked the gates."
Intimidation Increases
In the last week violence - or threats of violence - against unions, union officials and union members have increased, with rude anonymous telephone calls to families, homes and offices.
Earlier in the week the Assistant National Secretary of the Fiji TUC, Diwan Shankar, had his house almost burned to the ground in an arson attempt.
Radio Australia has reported that in the last 24 hours at least two other union officials have been threatened with jail if they tried to stop the sugar harvest.
ACTU representatives are now flying to Fiji to monitor the rapidly deteriorating crisis.
They will stay in Suva - the capital of Fiji - to attend a meeting on Monday of all South Pacific regional union movements, called by the ICFTU's Asia-Pacific Regional Organisation to discuss the crisis.
Coup Enters Second Month
On Monday the Fiji Labour Party leader and legitimate Prime Minister. Mahendra Chaudhrey, and the other MPs will have been held hostage in the Parliamentary complex for a month.
After Mr Anthony's arrest Sharan Burrow, the President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions protested loudly and angrily.
"The legitimate protest of Fijian workers against the high-jacking of their Government by this terrorist George Speight is being met with threats of imprisonment by the Fijian Military.
"The international community has a responsibility to intensify its action in support of the hostages and of democracy in Fiji," Ms Burrow said.
Meanwhile the New Zealand union movement announced today a stepping up of their Fiji bans starting from midday next Tuesday.
Orders From the Top
Speaking from Fiji Mr Anthony told Workers Online and LabourStart he was convinced that the order to detain him had come from the very top of the military heirachy.
The Military spokesperson in the West Captain Haward Politini said Anthony was detained to question him about his role in discouraging union members from harvesting and crushing cane.
But there was obviously some confusion in the military ranks because almost at the same time, in Suva, Lieutenant Colonel Filipo Tarakinikini was telling the NZPA Mr Anthony had not been arrested.
The leader of the Fiji TUC was, however. Convinced that his detention was on direct orders from the military leadership in the capital.
"The military headquarters in Suva made the decision and told their people here in the West ( of the main island) to hold me," Felix Anthony said.
Anthony was arrested at about 7am ( Fiji time) and held for three hours.
" They shunted me between barracks, they were very abusive, they were happy to rough me up, spit and swear," Felix Anthony said.
Anthony - who is also general secretary of the Fiji Sugar and General Workers Union - was on his way to meet the sugar mill workers in the western half of the main island when he was arrested.
He was released after Lieutenant Colonel Filipo Tarakinikini intervened and arranged to meet him in the capital Suva later in the day.
Emergency meeting
At the time we spoke to the Fiji TUC leader he was driving to Suva with a senior union colleague - Rajeshwar Singh - to hold an emergency meeting of the TUC.
Felix Anthony and Rajeshwar Singh are scheduled to be part of a TUC delegation meeting the military leader of Fiji , Commodore Bainimarama, at about 7pm (Fiji time) to protest today's arrest.
Rajeshwar Singh, as the general secretary of the Fiji Public Service Association, was scheduled to have flown to Sydney on Friday to lobby key political figures about the crisis in his country and its effect on public administration.
He cancelled his flight arrangements the moment news of Felix Anthony's arrest came through, deciding his role as the leader of one of the major unions meant he needed to stay in the country.
Mr Anthony's arrest came the day after Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer arrived in Suva with a Commonwealth delegation to press the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group's (CMAG's) call for a quick resolution to the crisis in Fiji.
Harvesting Disrupted
On Thursday Felix Anthony had toured cane growing areas where many farmers are refusing to harvest their cane to show their support for the return of a democratic constitutional government to Fiji.
Anthony had also spoken on Thursday to the management of the sugar mills about their threats to stand down all workers because of the cane harvest boycott.
The military is trying to intimidate the cane farmers into cutting the cane to help the Fijian economy.
"They have been threatening workers, threatening farmers, threatening that if they don't work they'll be bashed up, they'll be taken away, all sorts of things like that,." Felix Anthony said.
Anthony denied claims by the military that he had contravened a decree which forbids public gatherings during martial law.
The military has advised union leaders against organising meetings as they claim it contravenes Decree number 4 which states gatherings are not allowed during martial law.
" The military are using George Speight's coup as an excuse to exercise more power. I don't think they have any intention of restoring democracy to Fiji.
" More and more it appears that way to us. They are trying to exercise more power.
"If they want to return to democracy I don't see any justification in their behaviour."
Long-Term Control
Mr Anthony said there were several signs that the military regime was attempting to establish complete and long-term control of the country.
"The very fact that they decided to abrogate the constitution, the fact that they decided to appoint an interim government, indicates that they intend much more than simply maintaining the law and order situation," he said.
The cane growers and workers are refusing to harvest the cane to protest the military regime and to demand that Mr Mahendra Chaudhry - the democratically elected Fiji PM - and the other hostages should be released from Parliament.
Check LaborNet's Live News Feed for all the latest on the Fiji crisis
CFMEU construction division state secretary Andrew Ferguson has told Workers Online that thousands of building workers will flood the market, despite the Carr Government's post-Olympics public works program.
"The building industry is very much boom or bust, or feast or famine - it's always been like that, this time around it appears that the State Government is going to be making a significant contribution post Olympics to some very major infrastructure projects, so that will moderate the cycle to a certain extent," Ferguson says.
"But nevertheless we anticipate a 25 per cent downturn to building works, with in particular, unskilled labourers being displaced from the industry."
Ferguson says tradespeople have got better prospects of employment but that builders' labourers will simply get displaced in the industry and go into other industries or unemployment.
He says the CFMEU has been developing strategies to help worker cope with the downturn, including Building Workers Assistance Centre which helps place unemployed workers in jobs.
The union's training company, Comet, will also provide assistance to members that want to be re-trained for other industries.
by Noel Hester
The Office of the Employment Advocate recently sent out a Hamburger cookbook - the AWA-Call Centres Framework - to more than 9000 call centre employers in an ideological push to establish individual contracts as the principal employment contract for the industry.
Unions are responding with a campaign for a national award which is gaining significant momentum. The ASU, which covers contract call centres has engaged a number of major players in the industry - Teletech, Stellar, Service Partners, Salesforce and Salmat - in the drive for a national award.
The ASU has also won some significant victories at the enterprise level. Union members with national call centre operator Link Communications have just won a collective agreement with a 10% pay rise, much improved leave provisions, delegates rights and training and a commitment to develop an extensive pay structure which properly reflects their skills. The union presence has gone from zero to sixty per cent at Link's NSW, Queensland and South Australian operations.
Stress and poor management the industry norms
ASU National Call Centre Campaign Coordinator Colin Lynch says call centre employees are flocking to the union movement due to the poor working conditions in the unregulated environment of this new industry. A comprehensive national survey of call centres conducted by the ASU revealed 88% of respondents finding their job and workplace stressful. Over half the survey respondents felt they needed more training and support.
'Self regulation of the industry hasn't worked. Evidence from our surveys shows poor management skills and minimum work conditions are the industry norms. Intense competition in this unregulated industry is producing a highly stressed, excessively monitored and poorly trained workforce with low morale,' he said.
'An award is about fixing these problems. It's about trying to clean up the industry. Overseas research backs up our findings that poor management is the key source of stress and burnout in the industry.'
Colin Lynch says research by the key employer associations - ADMA and ATA - has found the same results but their self serving interpretation is different.
'They say the problem is with the individual worker and their answer is to find the 'right' sort of person through psychometric testing. They are trying to fit square pegs into round holes instead of cleaning up their own mess.'
'An award would give standards to the industry. But the award is only one of a number of things needed to improve working conditions for call centre employees. We are also developing OHS standards for the industry and a code of practice for call centre monitoring and surveillance.'
On a weekend, when unions urged the state government to take action on the issue, the plight of workers at Hurstville-based Carlton Shirts has come to light.
Former Carlton employee Zora Males told Labor Council how she had been shown the door after 19 years loyal service, owed more than $14,000. Under the Reith scheme she will lose more than one third of this amount.
And worse, because the firm ceased trading, rather than went into liquidation, the workers will not be able to access the Reith scheme until the company is formally liquidated by the TCFUA - at a cost to the union of about $10,0000.
In all, nine female production employees are owed an average of $6300 each in unpaid annual leave, long service leave, superannuation, notice and other entitlements.
The Textile Clothing and Footwear Union has been pursuing the company director through the Australian Industrial relations Commission, where the company says it has no assets to pay the entitlements. This is despite a closely related company owning the building housing the textiles factory.
Compo Scheme to Bridge Entitlements Gap?
Meanwhile, unions are urging the NSW Government to use the state's workers compensation system to help fill void left by the Peter Reith's flawed workers entitlements scheme.
The bridging option has been mooted as states maintain their opposition to the Howard Government's minimalist entitlements package that leave retrenched workers thousands of dollars out of pocket.
The push to supplement federal payments without endorsing the Reith scheme gathered momentum at last weekend's ALP State Conference.
In a motion moved by Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union state secretary Barry Tubner asks the state government to fund a test case to put trust funds protecting worker entitlements into industrial awards as well as developing the bridging proposal.
Labor Council secretary Michael Costa says one idea being explored is to impose a surcharge on WorkCover premiums. Firms showing they had made adequate provisions to cover entitlements could be exempted from the payment.
The issue has been placed on the agenda of the next meeting of the State Labor Consultative Committee.
The inquiry was requested by both unions and key industry operators to address concerns that rogue agencies were driving wages and conditions down.
NSW Industrial Relations Minister Jeff Shaw today announced the terms of reference of the taskforce will examine:
· the employment relationship between workers, labour hire companies and host employers in different Australian jurisdictions and whether NSW legislation should be clarified or varied
· consider OHS obligations and whether legislation should be clarified or varied
"The taskforce will look at industrial instruments with regard to labour hire and ensure the rights and obligations of employers and workers in labour hire are commensurate with those in other employment relationships in NSW," Shaw says.
Arising out of the terms of reference, Shaw says the taskforce will:
- examine the desirability of facilitating industrial instruments specifically for the labour hire industry, or of applying the prevailing conditions of the host employer to labour hire workers; and
- consider options to ensure the rights of workers on the labour hire firm and woirkers employed by the host company to organize and bargain collectively.
He says any recommendations will need to demonstrate that they will not unduly impose regulatory burdens on business that adversely affects employment.
Shaw says labour hire is a growing phenomenon and we need to adjust to changing workplaces. Over two per cent of NSW workplaces use labour hire and in industries such as finance and insurance the figure is over 50 per cent.
"We have been asked by both employer and employee groups, particularly the major labour hire firms, to clarify issues such as the employer/employee status and occupational health and safety responsibilities relating to labour hire," Shaw says.
NSW Labor Council secretary Michael Costa and four other union representatives have been invited to sit on the Taskforce. They will be: Annie Owens (LHMU), Andrew Ferguson (CFMEU), Russ Collison (AWU) and Bernie Roirdan (ETU).
The taskforce findings are due in October.
The Shadow industrial relations spokesman Arch Bevis says the Court's 4-3 decision to reject Union's Constitutional challenge to the Federal Government's Award-stripping provisions of the Workplace Relations Act increases Federal Parliament's power to regulate employment conditions.
"This opens the way for Peter Reith to decide minimum employment conditions, rather than the independent umpire", he says.
"The High Court has confirmed that Minister Reith may, through legislation, direct the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to alter any existing award.
"This opens a Pandora's box where Peter Reith and any future government will be able to directly legislate on minimum award entitlements."
Bevis says the real losers today are the lowest paid workers who are totally dependent on the award system for all their conditions of employment.
"Given that Peter Reith has not supported any living wage application since becoming Minister, the possibility of him having more power does not auger well for the most vulnerable in our workforce," Bevis says.
"For these reasons, Labor is committed to maintaining a strong and independent Commission and will proceed with a private member's bill to support these measures.
"Australian workers may now have Peter Reith making laws setting minimum employment conditions instead of the independent umpire. I know who I trust", he says.
Miners Vow to Fight On
Meanwhile, the CFMEU has vowed to intensify its political and on-the-job campaign for industrial justice, as the Full Bench of the High Court ruled by the narrowest of margins.
CFMEU Mining and Energy Division General President Tony Maher described the decision as "controversial" with the High Court judges contradicting each other in their judgements. "While the result was by the narrowest of margins, the reality is that the legal door has now been closed on us," Maher says.
"However, while our members and other workers throughout Australia continue to be deprived of industrial justice by Reith's laws, we will continue to fight.
"We will defend our conditions on the job and we will intensify our political campaign to reverse these rotten laws which rob workers of rights and conditions and victimize many of those who are prepared to fight for them."
With the closure of the legal door to award-stripping, the Union's fight must now be directed to the political arena and this means ensuring the defeat of the Howard Government at the next election.
It also means campaigning to ensure that a re-elected Federal Labor Government reverses these rotten industrial laws.
by Paddy Gorman
The members of the CFMEU were protesting against the freezing of their Award wages and the Commission's recent decision to give employers the right to force miners to work 10-hour shifts and apply for compulsory 12-hour shifts.
In an industry where an underground coal mineworker has a 1-in-28 chance of being killed during his or her working life, through this decision the AIRC is literally dicing with death.
In discarding the health and safety concerns of the workers, the Full Bench of the Commission, headed by its President Geoff Giudice, claimed that the compulsory shifts were needed to "reduce labour costs and boost productivity".
The Commission's 'justification' is contradicted by the most recent survey conducted and released by coal industry employers. It shows that wages ("labour costs") rose by 1.2% while productivity per employee rose by a staggering 18.4%.
It now seems that the employers want much more than miners' sweat, they want our blood too, and disgracefully the Commission has agreed to sign, seal and deliver mineworkers to them.
The Commission's decision to freeze the coal mining Award until other Awards catch up with it, could mean that some miners will have to wait up to 10-years for an wage increase
Former army officer Jim Terrie told this week's Labor Council that the ARM has undergone major changes since "it came to a grinding halt in March".
A new constitution is being written with all national and state executive positions to be fully democratic.
And the ARM is now not supporting any particular Republican model - and is directly appealing to Republicans who voted No in the Referendum to come on board.
Conceding that the trade union constituency was one group that the Yes case struggled to win at the Referendum, it was now important to engage with ordinary workers.
Terrie says the ARM is also seeking new members to breath life into the organization, that now faces a long haul of five to ten years before the proposition is put to the electorate again.
In the meantime, Terrie says community discussion and education are vital. One project currently underway is the development of a workplace education kit.
A full interview with Jim Terrie will appear in next week's Workers Online
The Millennium Hotel workers have raised the tips scam as one of a series of triggers for industrial action to occur next Thursday.
The workers say the Kings Cross hotel has had a long established practice of levying tour groups for "porterage" which is then distributed amongst porters as tips.
But new management of the hotel have come in, maintaining the levy but no longer passing it on to the porters.
Hotel Porter Alistair Campbell told this week's Labor Council that the policy had taken about $300 off his monthly take-home pay.
Other issues include underpayment of staff, unfair workloads for casuals and the denial of annual leave.
Room attendant Zenni Aruta says flexi-days have also been denied by management, leaving some workers holding more than 1560- hours but unable to claim it.
The Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union is assisting with the picket line and the barbeque which will take place 6am - where guests will be encouraged to support the workers.
Full details in next week's Workers Online.
by Noel Hester
The Day of Action is part of industrial action by members of the Australian Services Union. Workers aim to highlight the valuable community work covered by the sector and the state of crisis of many services.
In Sydney a rally will be held at NSW Parliament House, commencing at 11am. Busloads of SACS members from Wollongong, the Blue Mountains, Gosford and Newcastle are expected to attend. Similar rallies have been organised throughout the state
SACS activist Mary Waterford says the dire state of the award has driven community workers to take what they see as a drastic measure in industrial action.
'My current position is valued under the award at $36,847. This is despite my 21 years experience and a degree. I am representative of the level of experience and skill that features in the sector. If I was in Victoria I would be paid $43,401 for exactly the same sort of work. In other states I'd be paid up to $56,979. A group home manager for DOCS earns $48,000 per annum. A DOCS caseworker in disabilities is paid up to $46,361,' she said.
The Community Sector covers non-profit community services for the aged, homeless, people with disabilities, young people, women and families in need. Agencies include Neighbourhood Centres, Group Homes and other services for people with a disability; Community Legal Centres; Family Support Services; Women's Refuges; Youth Centres and Refuges and Hostels for the Homeless. Most services rely entirely on government funding in order to operate.
For more information on what's happening in your area on the day contact the following SACS activists:
Inner-City (Redfern) Simon Williams 9699-1614
Fairfield Judith Brownhill 9757-2121
Penrith Maree McDermott, 4721-8520
Blue Mountains Siobhan O'Beirne: 4782-4155
Parramatta / Merrylands Mara Ochoa, 9637-1535
Campbelltown WILMA Staff, 4627-2955
Armidale Pat Schultz 6772-5852
Broken Hill John Caesar 08 8087-3919
Coffs Harbour Paul Sekfy: 6568-4040
Kempsey Kempsey Youth Refuge Staff 6563-1230
Gosford: Kim McLoughy 4323-2374
Illawarra Marlene McLear: 4296-7077
Lismore Anita Brown 6672-8114
Newcastle Dawn Lotty 9310-4000
Orange Wendy Fisher 6362-8290
Wagga Peter Paramore 62576639
Moruya Paul Henley 4474 5055
Bega Rick Anderson 018 557 528
Wagga Cheryl Fogwell 6332 1449
The raw deal
· Eighty percent of social and community services workers are women
· The average salary is $25,000 (the average Australian average worker earns $38,000)
· The NSW Government's refusal to fund services to meet award obligations undermines pay equity in this female dominated industry.
· NSW has the lowest award rates for Social and Community Services workers in Australia.
by Noel Hester
Pay talks have been in train for over 18 months since the expiry of the last agreement. Resolute industrial action throughout Sydney Water and AWT forced management to substantially increase their pay offer from insulting initial levels to the final 14%.
There have been 9 appearances in the IR Commission over the EBA since a previous stopwork meeting on 12 April.
ASU Assistant Secretary John Tierney says there was a robust debate at the stopwork meeting that sent out a clear message to management about the state of the organisation and its direction.
'Even though our members finally accepted the offer they have have made it clear there is still a large amount of employee discontent with the management of the Corporation. They want better communication and consultation from management with union reps. It will be a serious mistake on management's part to continue take their employees for granted,' he said.
John Tierney says the IR Commission recommended that talks in the next Enterprise Agreement begin 3 months before the expiry of these agreements.
'This will give us the opportunity to take protected action if talks break down.'
UNIFAM program convenor Patty Lee says the aim of the course is to help those affected by the 11 workplace deaths that occur, on average, in NSW every week.
Lee says that after these accidents workmates and loved ones are often left alone to deal with the grief and trauma of the incident.
The free training is about developing partnerships between union delegates, workers employers and family members.
What is the training for?
You will be trained to provide support to those who grieve the loss of a work colleague, employee, friend or family member through a work-related death.
You will learn some important skills for developing effective partnerships in the workplace. These skills that will make a difference to you and others affected by work related death and trauma.
Who can enrol?
The training program is open to work-mates, managers, family members, union delegates and affiliates of people who have died in work-related incidents or from occupational diseases. It is also open to those who are employed or seek to support trauma victims from work-related death or serious injury.
Who is the program leader?
Patty Lee who is a Psychologist, Counsellor & Workshop facilitator will lead the training program. Patty has also worked extensively with families & individuals experiencing grief & trauma.
Guest speaker, Mary Yeager, OH& S Coordinator, Labor Council of NSW will talk and answer questions on the topic of: 'Helping People through the Legal System'.
What is Unifam?
Unifam Counselling & Mediation Service has provided services to the NSW community since 1977. Our aim is to prevent problems before they become too serious and to reduce and resolve conflict when it occurs by assisting in providing early intervention programs. "Partnerships in Grief" is part of the Men's Matters program.
Our vision is to enhance the quality of life for children, adults and families by improving and strengthening their relationships.
There is no COST for this training
When & where?
The program consists of two consecutive Saturdays from 9 am to 3.30 pm [with a half hour break for lunch] - July 1 & 8, 2000 at 27-29 Hassall Street. Parramatta 2150
To register send your name, address, phone and email to UNIFAM by clicking the button below
On that day the Korean Food Festival will take place in Beamish St Campsie. The Festival's major sponsors are the Korean Tilers Section of the CFMEU and Canterbury Council. Last year's inaugural Festival was a great success attracting over 10 000 visitors to Campsie.
Canterbury Councillor Ian Latham says the festival has rapidly become a major community and tourist event in Canterbury.
"The CFMEU should be congratulated for the support that they have shown this year," Latham says
The Festival this year will start at 10 am and go till 4 pm in Beamish St. There will be food and drinks for sale and free entertainment all day. Parking will be limited so visitors are advised to get the train to Campsie.
During the misery of last year's Hurricane Mitch that devastated several Central American countries, Cuban doctors were the first to arrive on the scene to help out.
As a result of their work Cuba set up a Latin American School of Medicine, which opened in Havana last September providing free training for around 2,000 trainees from 18 countries.
They urgently need your help - buy T-shirts with images of evolutionary leader Che Guevera and your money will go towards notebooks, paper and pencils for the trainees. Exercise books can also be donated.
The T-shirts cost $20 each and will be available at the Union Shop, 377 Sussex Street or contact CFMEU officials Phil Davey or Pedro Ranera on 02 9287 9387.
Barlow is renowned as an articulate and powerful citizen's advocate and a champion of fair trade and social justice values in an era of trade liberalisation .
She was a key international campaigner against the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) -she posted the confidential draft MAI agreement on the internet in 1997. She was listed by the New Internationalist magazine as one of six key economic thinkers who have challenged dominant economic thought .
Her views will inform the current ALP debate on fair trade versus free trade which will continue at the ALP National conference in July.
Her topic is "What's wrong with Free Trade? Canadian and global campaigns on NAFTA, the MAI and WTO".
When: Tues June 27, 6.30 pm
Where: Merewether Bldg Lecture Theatre 2, University of Sydney, City
Rd, Darlington (south of the footbridge)
$10 and $5 concession to cover the costs of her visit
Her visit is sponsored by the Australian Fair Trade Network (AFTINET) a network of 30 unions and community organisations including the ACTU, the AMWU, the AEU and the CFMEU. For further information contact mailto:pranald@piac.asn.au
Indeed, dear editor, just who do you think we unionists rally and demonstrate for? I rally for my class and my allies, not the television cameras. I do not tailor my demands to fit in with Packer's or Murdoch's idea of what makes worthwhile news. You clearly believe we should all rally for your class and your allies . . . unfortunately, I don't think these are the same as mine.
Perhaps you might not be so confused if you got off-line, out of your Sussex Street comfort zone and into the real workplaces, onto building sites, chicken processing factories and outworkers' sweatshops. Maybe you do need to meet some real workers, not hand picked puppets of the Labor Council.
Are you so unaware of the class forces in this capitalist economy, that you cannot understand that media images are manipulated to suit the bosses? Your editorial has made it clear that you and the Labor Council are not interested in building a mass movement of workers to challenge the bosses.
The latest editorial makes it clear the Labor Council is not genuinely interested in engaging rank and file workers unless they can provide the "correct" media colour and image, to shore up your pathetic beliefs that "If we let some token rank and file unionists give a speech at a stage managed rally, then the rank and file will come back to us, the Labor tops, all our craven capitulation to capital during the Hawke-Keating years will be forgiven."
Interesting that you admit the "off-putting" building workers made up the majority of the rally. Interesting that the Democrats responded to those nasty, brutish, loud and angry building workers. If your new organizing model is what so many people allegedly want, how come they aren't responding to that model by turning out onto the streets? Why weren't the tidy, pliable "general public" at the rally, outnumbering the building workers? Perhaps it's time to tweak the model a bit!
Why do you think the union movement is losing members? It's not because people have all embraced your personally profitable new model of work -- where we get to pick and choose our jobs and pay and conditions. The union movement is losing members precisely because of the "new model" of work -- casual, poorly paid, no security. Yet the union movement bureaucrats like yourself trumpet this "new model" as an advance in working conditions!! The "general public" are pissed off because of this sort of betrayal by the Labor Council, the Labor Party and the Labor bureaucrats. We don't need bread and circuses, we need leaders who will not patronise us, attempt to stifle our initiative and courage or sell us out at every turn.
Out here in the real world, we don't actually have your "choices." We can't afford tertiary education, so we can't skill up to be cyber-unionists, we can't participate in our communities, because we can't afford the costs, our kids' bread is rationed because there is too much week left at the end of the pay packet. How real is any of this to you? And how much do you even care?
The current Labor Council has become a sad copy of the parody of the chardonnay-sipping, cappuccino-quaffing, skivvy-wearing stereotype of the inner city dilettante who dabbles in left-ish politics, until it comes to the crunch and their actual class allegiances are revealed.
We rally because we believe in strength in unity. I don't think the general public is afraid of us, I think the Labor Council and the ALP are afraid of workers they can't control any more. Maybe the Labor Council had better do some more research . . . into why we are angry, hungry and getting louder.
Sincerely yours,
Susan Barley
Member: PSA (NSW)
Member: Bakery, Confectionery and Tobacco Workers Union (USA)
I am working on compiling a book of experiences about the cost to various activists of their activism in terms of their jobs and careers. I really feel this is worth doing to raise awareness of how people suffer for their beliefs.
I was reading in an article which mentioned Elizabeth Fox-Genovese who was harassed out of her job for speaking publicly on behalf of Feminists for Life.
I would be interested to hear from anyone from just about any campaign, where they have been unfairly dismissed, demoted or harassed in work, because of their colleagues or bosses' view of them for being an activist.
Email me please on 100706.3632@compuserve.com if you have any union members who have had such an experience and might be willing to share their story in this book. If anything comes of it, and there is any profit, which in any case is doubtful, I am willing to share it equally between the people whose stories are used. If I get lots of stories, I can't promise to use them all, but I am short of stories right now. I am in the UK, but I am interested in hearing from people worldwide.
I am no expert writer, so I intend to let people's own stories speak for themselves, just as I would like to let my own story speak for itself.
In my case I suffered workplace discrimination and demotion about 15 years ago, due to my animal rights views (I can't prove it, that is the problem) and I am also interested in hearing from not only animal rights and environmental campaigners, but also pro-life OR pro-choice, peace or other life/political/social issue activists, from anywhere in the world. It doesn't matter if you are left- or right-wing politically.
I acknowledge that injustices of this type happen to many people, and although I have certain views and may not agree with the views of all the people whose stories I include, it is my view that if you do your job properly, you should not be in trouble at work, and in any case your politics should not be grounds for harassment.
Please could you pass this message on to the right person in your organisation, if it is outside of your area of expertise, thank you.
Lesley Dove
It is a pleasure to be here in the birthplace of this country.
These are great and challenging times for the Australian Labor Party where we now hold office in four out of the six States - the whole of the eastern seaboard is Labor.
And soon this wonderful city will be fulfilling a dream when it hosts the Olympics Games.
It was so good to see the images this week of the torch arriving at Uluru in the heart of this nation, and to see it received with such warmth by the Aboriginal people, on behalf of all of us.
It was a bit of a foretaste of September when the brilliance of our young people, our athletes and swimmers and all the others, will be displayed before the world.
The open hearts of the Aboriginal people of central Australia, as they took part in the torch relay, reminded me of the spirit of the Sydney people who walked the bridge of reconciliation on this day a fortnight ago.
It was so good that there was a Labor Government here in NSW to ensure that gesture was made: that a great Australian symbol, the Sydney Harbour Bridge, was given over to the people on that day.
The country was crying out for good leadership, and for a proper place to express the feelings of the people.
And Bob Carr grasped that moment, and crossed the bridge, along with his political opponent.
And with hundreds of thousands of Australians, of all colours and ages, I was privileged to be there on that great day.
Of course it was always a bridge too far for John Howard.
Just as on so many other issues of importance to this country, we find John Howard playing the spoiler's role.
We are going to have to walk around John Howard if we are ever to get true reconciliation in this country.
Soon we will be celebrating a hundred years of Federation - 100 years since the small collection of colonies took the courageous first step of forging a strong Constitution, and then persuading the British Government to accept it.
That steady spirit we saw on the reconciliation walk was at work there during the Federation years.
That Australian firmness of purpose -- without showiness, in a practical way -- pulling together the different parts into a strong and democratic whole.
Again, when attempting to celebrate 100 years of nationhood in a meaningful way, we have been blocked by John Howard.
I suppose given his character there was little chance our Prime Minister would be able to rise to the occasion history demanded, to put us on the road to the republic.
But we'll walk above and beyond the blocker. It will just take a little longer.
Next year's Federation celebrations will take place the same year as the Federal Labor Caucus celebrates its 100th birthday.
The Party has come a long way since its 22 Labor members, elected to the first Federal Parliament in 1901, agreed to form the federal Labor Party under the leadership of a Sydney printer called Watson.
The changes in our party since that time reflect the changes in the world around us - changes we have taken up with creativity and enthusiasm, separating us so clearly from our opponents.
We are now an outward-looking party, which believes in engaging strongly with our region.
We are the party with the vital links to the countries to our north.
It was under Labor that the economy was opened domestically and internationally. This involved embracing free trade, the deregulation of financial markets, and ultimately the creation of many more jobs.
The truth is there is no option to stand still. In a time of unprecedented change, nobody gets to stay the same.
I understand why, under the Howard Government, some people, and some regions, feel the pace has been too fast.
The Howard Government has made no attempt to help people adjust to globalisation and increased competition. They've been left to fend for themselves.
This Government has ripped away the helping hand Labor used to provide. It has cut back education and training schemes, labour market programs, child care places.
No wonder some people ask why they feel they must shoulder an unfair burden, while all around them they see others reaping the rewards.
But that is not an argument against embracing open markets and the new economy.
There are now 1.7 million jobs dependent on exports in this country - that's one in five people in work. About 750,000 jobs depend on exports to East Asia alone.
In the manufacturing industries, jobs in exporting firms can pay up to 30 percent higher wages than other firms, so it's in Australian workers' interests to be involved in trade.
Australia is a stronger country in part because of our greater integration into the world economy. Thirty years ago, Australia's exports stood at just over 10 per cent of GDP. Today, our annual exports of over $114 billion amount to about 20 per cent of national output. It's a much bigger cake, and exports have a much bigger share of it.
All this shows us there's no sense in closing ourselves off from the world. Rather, we should be working towards the election of a national Government that cares about equity, and a fair go for all.
Under Labor we will re-establish programs that allow everyone to share in the strong economy.
The opportunities are there as never before for a lively, free society like ours to embrace new ideas, to take part in the explosive advances in technology and science, at home and abroad.
We want Australians to be in the vanguard of the worldwide knowledge revolution.
But we will demand that opportunities are shared, and that the most needy are protected.
These are core Labor values. That's what we offer, in stark contrast to our opponents in John Howard's Government.
I think, at long last, people all over this country are waking up to John Howard.
They are waking up to him on his twin political aims - he's always had them - to bring in the GST, and to belt the workers and their unions.
People are starting to see the deceit and delusion at work in this unfair and unnecessary Goods and Services Tax - set to hit the most vulnerable in our society in less than a month - the pensioners, young families, and students, among them.
It's worth remembering some of John Howard's words when he deceived the Australian people about his intentions on this tax.
John Howard issued a press release on 2 May 1995 which said this:
"Suggestions in today's Australian that I have left open the possibility of a GST are completely wrong.
A GST or anything resembling it is no longer Coalition policy.
Nor will it be policy at any time in the future.
It is completely off the political agenda in Australia."
And then on the same day he was interviewed by the media:
Howard: No, there's no way that a GST will ever be part of our policy.
Journalist: Never ever?
Howard: Never ever. It's dead. It was killed by the voters in the last election...It's not part of our policy and it won't be part of our policy at any time in the future.
But still people doubted his word. So, on December 11, 1995 he did a radio interview in which he was asked again if he had a plan to introduce a GST, and he said this:
Howard: One of the worst things about politics in Australia at the moment is that the public doesn't believe what its political leaders say. Now I'm telling you ... it is not on the agenda, full stop.
Presenter: Would you like it to be?
Howard: No, it's not on the agenda, full stop. Just not there. Vamoose. Kaput.
Well, how could we all have so misinterpreted those words? I mean, he said it in English. He said it in Spanish - vamoose. He said in German - kaput. Perhaps we should have asked for the French translation, or the Danish or Swahili.
Whatever language he used it would have been a supreme and deliberate untruth.
Labor has recently been focussing attention on the savage abuse of taxpayers' money as the Government has thrown more than $430 million into the scandalous Unchain My Wallet campaign to try to persuade people this tax is a good thing.
Now, of course, it was largely through the good work of Labor senators, constantly grilling government officials, that we found out how much the GST campaign cost.
It was Labor stalwarts John Faulkner and Robert Ray who winkled out of the government that this unprecedented propaganda campaign was costing so much. Is it any wonder that Faulkner and Ray are known to some Liberals in Canberra as Bad Cop and Worse Cop.
The great triumph of these Labor bloodhounds this week was when they forced the Government to back down on John Howard's illegal letter.
This was a $10 million mail-out the Prime Minister was planning. He wanted to send signed letters to all voters, by name, improperly using electoral roll information.
And in the most breathtaking part of this entire scheme he was going to send the taxpayers the bill! We would be paying for these letters.
Faulkner and Ray first told the Government in May that this use of the rolls was illegal and unprecedented.
But until this week, the Government just wouldn't listen. The Prime Minister kept telling the public all was above board, and that all the correct procedures had been followed.
On Thursday the Government was forced to admit that the Prime Minister's plan was a breach of the law.
The Labor Party's complaints were upheld by the Attorney-General's Department. And those letters will all have to be pulped.
And of course in the Labor Party we're calling it Pulp Fiction.
Our Party has been fighting these issues as any effective Opposition would. We put our resources on the line - not the taxpayers'. We used the institutions of democracy to expose this planned improper use of public resources.
You are all political enthusiasts. Can I recommend to you that you trawl through the records of Senate Estimates these last few weeks. You will be proud of your elected representatives.
We demand that every cent that improper John Howard letter cost - the printing, the addressing, and even the pulping - be paid for by the Liberal Party.
And I also want to announce today that I intend to follow up this episode by introducing a Private Member's Bill into the Parliament banning the use of taxpayers' funds for blatant political propaganda exercises.
The Bill I will introduce will outlaw the spending of taxpayers' money on ad campaigns of a partisan political nature, such as the Government's current GST campaign.
The Government's current campaign is grossly excessive. It does not present factual material in an explanatory, fair and objective way.
The guidelines in our Bill will ensure that material will be presented in unbiased and objective language. It must be presented free from partisan promotion of government policy, and political argument.
If passed, this Bill will stop taxpayers' money being spent on any more cynical campaigns to promote the Coalition's prospects for re-election.
The Labor Party has done much to publicise the fact that if you took back the money from the Government's fraudulent $430 million GST campaign you could do so much more for ordinary, hard-working Australians.
You could fund at least 1,400 extra public hospital beds; or re-open closed wards; or keep some smaller country hospitals open.
With $431 million, the Government could have funded treatment of around 170,000 extra hospital patients over the next 4 years, slashing waiting lists across the country.
But one thing this Government will never understand is that it doesn't matter how much you spend on advertising - you won't sell a dud product.
Because this GST is going to become another in the long line of Liberal Party lemons - first Incentivation, then Fightback and now the 10 percent GST.
It will sit there alongside the great classic lemons - the Leyland P76, and the NSW Branch of the Liberal Party.
We in the Labor Party have been pointing out since before the last election that the Howard Government has been hoodwinking people about the GST in three important ways:
· They have consistently understated how much prices will go up;
· They have totally overestimated the adequacy of their compensation;
· They have attempted to disguise the complexity of the scheme.
In the last fortnight in Parliament we have found that their famous promise that nothing would go up the full ten percent under the GST - a promise made by Peter Costello - was totally wrong.
They tried to tell us in January that the law would not allow anything to go over ten percent. Well, the Government's watchdog, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, has finally been forced to admit that there is no law that keeps price rises under 10 percent.
We have already found a swag of goods and services that we know will go up by 10 percent or more on July 1, including Workers' Compensation premiums, rental appliance agreements, and items of clothing.
Do you remember the Government's promise that prices would rise by only 1.9 per cent ?
The ACCC has now told us that children's clothes from July 1 will go up 9.8 percent, electricity and gas bills by 9.5 percent. If you want to get the plumber and electrician out that will be an extra 9.5 percent. And whether you go out or stay in on a weekend night - it's 8 percent extra on either the movies or the video hire.
And prices are going up already in anticipation of the new tax.
Of course, you can't entirely blame the small business people who are putting prices up because their suppliers have told them they'll be passing on the full ten percent.
Small businesses have spent thousands of dollars each trying to get ready to become tax collectors come July 1.
At every point they've come up against bureaucratic bungling - websites that don't work, phone numbers that are never answered, wrong answers from officials, or no answers at all.
Everyone knows the GST equals higher prices, which equals higher inflation and higher interest rates.
On compensation, the Government keeps telling us that it will make sure no one is worse off.
But this week, after a lot of digging in the Parliament, we discovered just how little truth John Howard tells about the GST.
The Government promised many pensioners $1000 to compensate for the effect the GST would have on their savings. But now it turns out, for many of them, this cash will be worthless. If they save it, it will reduce their pension.
So much for compensating the elderly!
We also found out that after two months, two panic attacks, and two backflips, the Government is still making any parent who stops work to care for a child after June 30, worse off than under the current system.
And we all know the value of the much-touted tax cuts has already been eroded by the interest rate rises triggered by this risky tax scheme.
Now, of course these men of yesterday in the Howard Government have another big idea apart from introducing a GST.
That other big idea is to totally change the industrial landscape of this country, to take away the proper power of the Industrial Relations Commission - the fair umpire - and to hit ordinary workers and their trade unions for six.
On industrial relations, under John Howard and Peter Reith, it's a return to the bad old days of confrontation. That's their idea of industrial relations. Belt the workers and toss out the independent umpire.
Because you never hear any talk about unity or cooperation from our opponents. They are the wreckers. They're the ones that bring in the men in balaclavas, and the attack dogs, against workers on the waterfront.
So aggressive and divisive is the Howard/Reith regime that a Victorian Supreme Court judge described it a few months ago as "ritualised mayhem in which only the innocent are slaughtered".
Labor's policy could not be more different from the Coalition's.
We believe it is good economic policy as well as good social policy to have -- and to maintain -- a cooperative, cohesive, skilled, safe and fair workplace.
Labor's policies to ensure this start with three basic points.
First, Labor's industrial law will require all parties to negotiate in good faith. Our law will support the primacy of collective forms of bargaining and we will give precedence to it. But it will insist on good faith bargaining, whatever bargaining options are preferred.
Second, our law will recognise that the right of employees to act, organise and protect themselves collectively is a prime element of justice in the workplace.
Third, we will restore the powers of the independent umpire, the Industrial Relations Commission, so that it can bring back fairness in the workplace, act in the public interest, and keep the industrial peace.
We'll ensure that, among the principal objects of our industrial legislation, the Commission will have the power to conciliate when bargaining gets bogged down and, where necessary, to arbitrate.
I guess you can't expect too much from John Howard and Peter Reith - men of the past on so many issues.
As I like to say about them - they're in love with the past and at war with the future.
But the tragedy is that what we need in this country more than ever before is a cooperative industrial relations system, a workplace where work and family can be balanced, and a highly-productive, highly-skilled workforce.
We need to position ourselves to take advantage of the huge scientific and technological changes we are facing.
You know I have been talking a lot lately about how we can make Australia one of the world's leading "Knowledge Nations".
When we talk about making Australia a Knowledge Nation we're not just talking about the need to produce more scientists and more biotechnology research, although this will be absolutely critical, and one of our priorities.
It involves all Australian workers, and their families.
It's about helping Australians upgrade their skills so they can move to better employment. It's about assisting people who leave school early to re-train, to keep ahead of the changes in each and every workplace.
It's about giving our children the best start in life, and access to the best our education system has to offer, whatever the income level or location.
And it's about helping small businesses that are being held back by a lack of trained job applicants, when they see all around them unskilled people who can't find a job
The research that we released in February -- Workforce 2010 -- told us that the economies that will grow the fastest over the coming decades will be those with the most highly trained and educated workforce.
And what does the Howard Government intend to do about this? Have a look at The Weekend Australian newspaper yesterday and you'll see what they have in mind.
Before this GST is even introduced, they are leaking a story that they want to spend another $20 billion of taxpayers' money before the next election, trying to buy back votes.
There they are saying they will spend all that money on tax cuts, or other bribes. This Federal Government will say anything, do anything, and spend any amount of taxpayers' dollars to hold on to office. It's all about short term political gain - and nothing to do with nation building.
They would do anything to try to make Australians forget how much they have ripped out of the Budget since 1996 - ripped away decent services Australians have sorely missed - only to then spend that money and more trying to make the GST palatable.
We know they have taken away education, and training, and labour market programs, and child care, and perhaps worst of all, they have allowed our once great public hospital system to run down.
Well, these are programs you can rely on the Labor Party to restore in a fiscally responsible way- programs to make families safe and secure and whole once again.
And I just want to pay tribute to Bob Carr on this matter. Bob has managed to increase State recurrent spending on education and training by 26 percent since 1995.
Bob Carr knows the importance to the future of our country in getting a sound education and training system in place.
If only the Federal Government had the same priorities, Australia would not be the only major country whose Commonwealth spending on these vital programs, as a proportion of GDP, is actually declining.
I look forward to unveiling more of these ideas at the National Conference later in the year.
In the meantime I want to pay tribute today to the great ideas and the hard work that we see from NSW representatives at both the State and Federal level.
I want to assure you that Labor is working hard to be well positioned with its policies whenever John Howard calls the next election.
I will tell the Australian people our policies in detail before the next election - an election that should be at the end of next year, after another Howard Budget.
The Australian people will know fully what we intend - and what will be on offer will be a Beazley Labor Government that will roll the GST back, and restore fairness in industrial relations. A Labor Government that cares about families, and cares about ensuring Australia has a strong future.
It will be a stark contrast to the Howard Government which has no plans other than a cynical vote-buying spree.
I know I can rely on all of you for the effort and commitment to overturn the Howard Government's backward-looking agenda, and to help persuade people all over this country that there is a better way.
Finally, let me say how proud I am to address the great NSW Conference of the Australian Labor Party. Your Conference has always been an important fixture of the Australian political calendar, and of Australian political history.
This is the conference that gave the nation Prime Ministers of the calibre of Ben Chifley, Gough Whitlam and Paul Keating.
I'm told your next conference will be in October 2001. That is when I hope and intend to return to address you as the latest in the line of Labor Prime Ministers building this nation the Labor way - the Australian way.
by Zoe Reynolds
Far too few women work in the world's transport industries and far too many of those who do are subjected to rape, sexual harassment and substandard working conditions.
This is what MUA member, Port Botany wharfie and Asia Pacific representative to the International Transport Workers' Federation women's committee, Sue Gajdos reported to National Council on May 18.
"At the ITF women's meeting in April, we were all asked to report," said Sue Gajdos. "It was disheartening to hear about how common it is for female employees to be raped by their employers and colleagues in South Asia and Africa.
"Countries such as these also persecute the victims of such attacks. Male superiors say the women deserved to be raped - that they must have provoked the attack. Reports of management requesting sexual favours in exchange for overtime are also common. Sometimes a woman worker's future employment with the company depends on providing such favours."
Such widespread sexual abuse is, happily, not common in Australia. We have a sexual harassment policy. But harassment still happens and will continue to happen while women are a minority in the workplace.
Gajdos said it was her sad duty to report to the ITF on the decline of women members across the Australian transport industry. Labour trends in Australia show a rise in female participation in the last decade with 64 per cent of women working (up 6 per cent). But on the waterfront our membership files show that women members only make up 1.18 per cent of all members, down from two years ago.
In seafaring it is little better. (2.23 per cent) and mostly in traditional women's jobs on board the Spirit of Tasmania. Most MUA women (over 60 per cent) are casuals. The Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers report only four women engineers. But the burnout rate is high due to sexual harassment problems.
Numbers in the Transport Workers' Union here, are much the same (three per cent of workers are women, most are casual) However the TWU is pushing an affirmative action program in the lead up to the Olympics.
Sue Gajdos called on the MUA to do the same. "Affirmative action is a misunderstood policy," she said. "It does not mean giving less qualified women jobs over better qualified men. But it does mean that if a woman is as good or better than a man applying for the same job, the position should go to the woman. This should also apply when
upgrading people from casual to permanent positions."
"This union is still perceived as macho," said Gajdos. "It is viewed as a union not afraid to flex its industrial muscle - an image cleverly manipulated and used against us during the Patrick dispute. And still used against us now."
This, Gajdos stressed, is unfair. The MUA has done much for its women members - the inaugural women's conference, 1995, the formation of an interim women's committee, developing sexual harassment policies, appointing a woman to the ITF women's conference, a women's observer to council.
"But we need to do more," she said. "Not just for women, but to boost the image of the union."
The 1998 Patrick dispute and the departure of women's liaison officer Assistant National Secretary Vic Slater under such sad circumstances brought all efforts to promote women in the union to a halt - understandably.
The MUA women's conference was first held in 1995. The women's interim committee set up to meet twice a year, has been unable to meet since 1997.
National Council minutes of September 1997 record the following resolution:
"...The union will actively encourage the participation of its women members in the work of the union to achieve more opportunities for employment and for a career path in the stevedoring, shipping industry and port authorities ..... The national officers will develop proposals in consultation with the Women's Committee to enable national council to endorse initiatives to achieve these objectives..."
The union has resolved to reconvene the women's committee and hold a national women's conference this year. The committee's task will be to develop an affirmative action program promoting women in the maritime industry. A women's committee member attends all council meetings and a national officer is responsible for co-ordinating women's issues and policies.
Meanwhile the Australian Council of Trade Unions has appointed its second woman as president and determined to ensure women, in future, make up half of its executive members.
And the ITF women's committee has launched a global campaign "Women Transporting the World." The campaign is aimed at improving women transport workers employment rights, increasing their international and national activities, recognising the changing workforce and assisting the drive to mobilise more women members in the transport unions.
They overflowed onto the surrounding sidewalks at the fourth, and by far the largest, of the AFL-CIO forums on immigrant workers' rights.
"Every day when immigrants go to work, millions of them face low wages, violations of their rights, insults and discrimination, AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Linda Chavez-Thompson told the crowd of ore than a dozen nationalities, hundreds of whom waved U.S. flags and the flags of their homelands.
Immigrant workers in the United States, especially the 5 million to 6 million undocumented workers, are easy targets for exploitive employers who routinely violate their most basic rights-the rights to safe workplaces, overtime pay, minimum wage and the freedom to form a union, Chavez-Thompson said. At AFL-CIO immigrant rights forums in Los Angeles, New York, Chicago and Atlanta, immigrant workers testified that when they stand up for their rights, their employers routinely threaten and fire them.
"Time after time," Chavez-Thompson said, "we see employers try to divide us from our sisters and brothers. They try to pit immigrants against non-immigrants, documented against undocumented, and try to drive down the wages and working conditions of all."
In February the AFL-CIO Executive Council called for major reforms in U.S. immigration laws, which routinely are used to punish workers. Instead, the federation is seeking changes that would criminalize employer exploitation of immigrant workers and allow undocumented immigrants who are in the United States and contributing to their communities an opportunity to become U.S. citizens.
Seamstress Lupita Vargas said she often goes weeks without being paid and believes her employer takes advantage of her undocumented status.
"What can I tell her? Nothing, because she knows I am here illegally," she told the Orange County Register. "She knows I'm afraid to go anywhere else. But now maybe in the future, I will be able to work for an employer who doesn't take advantage of me."
"Looking for a better future for our families is not illegal," Seattle construction worker José Angel Juarez Falcon told the cheering L.A. Sports Arena crowd.
Several times during the high-spirited rally, participants let the world know,
"Aquí estamos y no nos vamos"-"We are here to stay and we are not leaving."
Miguel Contreras, executive secretary-treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, said the immigration issue has helped build one of the largest coalitions of unions, people of all faiths, immigrant rights groups and immigrants representing dozens of nationalities.
Representatives of many of those groups are meeting in Los Angeles to map out mobilization and legislative strategies for reform.
"The rights of working people and the rights of immigrants are one and the same. In the past, this movement has fought for the rights of Irish and Italian and Slovak workers-for African Americans and Asian Americans and Latinos-for working women and lesbians and gays and workers with disabilities," Chavez-Thompson said as the forum drew to a close.
"I promise you here and now that we're fighting for exactly the same thing for exactly the same reasons for this generation of immigrants in the workplace."
by Zoe Reynolds
A coalition of environment, labour and community groups, the Australian Eastern Seaboard & Ocean Protection (AESOP) was set up last summer in response to community outrage over Taiwanese companies devastating slabs of our coast for prawn farming, employing illegal workers and polluting our marine environment.
AESOP approached national office to join its campaign. In return the coalition has offered to lend support to the MUA/ITF flag of convenience and the Save our National Fleet campaigns.
"Alliances work well in Australia," said AESOP facilitator Sue Arnold. "Given the massive problems created by the World Trade Organisation, it seems timely that trade unions and community groups with common interests come together. The example of the Teamsters and Turtles in the US has been particularly effective."
MUA National Secretary John Coombs advocates union involvement in the campaign and is alerting relevant branch and port officials about the coalition in the hope the MUA can join the campaigns locally.
"The Maritime Union and the ITF have a strong policy and commitment to protecting the ocean environment, campaigning strongly against pollution of coastal waters by substandard shipping," the national secretary said in his correspondence with AESOP spokeswoman Sue Arnold.
"We have a joint position with Greenpeace against flag of convenience shipping in the world's tuna industry. As well, Greenpeace and the ITF are jointly campaigning against the pollution and exploitation at the world's ship wrecking yards. As such, we are most interested in supporting your
stance against the excalating number of foreign owned intensive prawn farms damaging Australian beaches."
Union relations with environmental groups is growing. Last year Greenpeace joined forces with the International Transport Workers' Federation/MUA in the campaign against illegal fishing by flag of convenience operators, signing a joint submission to the ILO. And Green politicians in NSW have offered to support the MUA in broad range of activities including Maritime Day.
The Surfrider Foundation, Queensland SunFish, a 40,000 strong recreational fisherfolk organisation, National Toxic Network, ORRCA (Ocean Rescue), North Queensland Conservation Council, Wildlife Protection Society, Australians for Animals, Water Research Foundation, Armstrong Beach Progress Association, environmental lawyers, scientists, and ndigenous groups are among the other groups supporting the coalition.
Reports of Taiwanese prawn farms operating in Queensland employing illegal workers on well below union rates were confirmed in February when l7 men were arrested on one prawn farm just north of Proserpine. Earth moving operators are being paid $10 a hour, whilst labourers are getting between $7-$9 an hour.
Mackay radio and press have run reports accusing the federal government of protecting foreign interests, and showing contempt for local people by refusing to do public environment reports before allowing the new developments.
Reports of prawn farms pumping 75,000 litres of pollutant into the local creek and coastal waters, destroying corals and breeding grounds for other marine creatures are widespread.
Sue Arnold says the situation is likely to get a whole lot worse. A recent Queensland Government funded study identified 87,278 hectacres, over 675 km of coastline as potential sites for intensive prawn farms.
The Goldilands farm at Armstrong Beach, for example, has been given a licence (for the term of its operation) for a minimum daily discharge of 37 500 m3 as well as being permitted to change up to 20 per cent of the surrounding biodiversity.
"Sixty hectares of pristine coastal forest has been bulldozed to the ground," said Sue Arnold. "Great holding bays have been gouged out of the forest graveyard. The damage is awesome to witness."
A study by the North Queensland Conservation Council of 10 intensive prawn farm licences issued in that state showed a total discharge of contaminants annually of 130 million cubic metres. Licences in one area permitted a discharge volume equivalent to the sewage outflow of about 1.5 million
people!
All these developments are affecting our World Heritage Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Sue Arnold says AESOP may well follow the example of the Tasmanian salmon farmers who are seeking undertakings from the big supermarket chains that they will only buy Australian salmon.
"So next time you chuck a prawn on the barbie, make sure it doesn't come from a Queensland based intensive prawn farm!"
For further information, contact Sue Arnold, Acting Facilitator, AESOP Coalition:
Email: mailto:arnolds@mullum.com.au
Mail: PO Box 673, Byron Bay.NSW. 2481,
by Labour History
In 1978 J.W. McCarthy argued that labour historians were preoccupied with `the rise of the labour problematic' - the growth of trade unions and political labour parties. They ignored 'how the great majority of the working classes lived and worked, and what they thought' and showed little interest in functional regional history, which included histories of `a town or city and its hinterland'. McCarthy believed that this form of regional history or local history may challenge `orthodox discussion' of `how class, class consciousness and politics worked in a specific setting'.
As McCarthy recognised at that time there appeared to be the beginnings of broadening of labour history away from the `labour problematic'. From the 1960s the traditional approaches to writing labour history came under challenge in Australia. There was a shift away from labour institutions towards the study of workers and their everyday working lives. The background was social protest and political unrest. There was opposition to the Vietnam war and there were demands for Aboriginal civil rights. The growth of the women's liberation movement in late 1960's and 1970's also challenged the male establishment in Australia. University students were involved in these movements and demanded that courses be developed to deal with power, imperialism, race and gender. Australian labour historians were influenced by the writings of British Marxist labour historians such as E.P. Thompson and Eric Hobsbawm. These developments influenced the editorial committee of Labour History. Special issues appeared: Women at Work in 1975 and Who are Our Enemies? Racism and the Working Class in Australia in 1978. The range of articles widened to include convict protest, nineteenth century feminism and the political consciousness of the unemployed. In May 1981 the journal adopted the subtitle, A Journal of Labour and Social History and since then the percentage of articles in the journal dealing with the traditional fare of Australian labour history - the Labor Party, the Communist Party, trade unions, strikes and radical movements - has declined.
Australian labour historians have continued to explore new ideas and broaden the focus of their subject. Some Australian labour historians have shown an interest in the concept of `community' . An important early example was Ellen McEwen's study on the Newcastle coalmining district. Recent examples include a chapter on `community' in a major overview of Australian labour history and studies published on Port Kembla and Broken Hill, Ipswich and Wagga Wagga. Australian interest in the idea of community has centred on `localism' - a sense of place which can influence behaviour. Localism can centre on a particular town or city, region, state or nation and does not deny the importance of class, gender or race.
The concept of community has been relatively underdeveloped in Australian labour history for several reasons. The extent of trade unionism and the electoral success of the Labor Party encouraged institutionalism in Australian labour history. Labour organisations have been willing to fund official histories. Recent examples include histories of the Australian Workers' Union, the Labor Council of New South Wales and the Australian Railways Union. In addition, there have been several histories of the Australian Labor Party at the state and federal level and a major history of the Communist Party.
While Howard Kimeldorf, a US labour historian, has suggested that community study contributes to a removal of unions as the focus of labour history, an examination of `community' or `localism' does not mean that labour historians are no longer interested in labour institutions. As David Montgomery, another US labour historian, notes, `more often than not the climax of community histories has been the mobilisation of workers for struggle, usually through unions'. Likewise, Bradon Ellem and John Shield's study of the Barrier Industrial Council has highlighted that research focussing on particular localities can provide insights into broader institutional issues such as why unions form peak labour bodies.
For Australian labour historians the controversy about the meaning of `community' and its ideological ambiguity in sociology limits its appeal. By the mid-1950s one sociologist noted that there were 94 different definitions. The association of the term `community' with the `good life' and social cohesion have made it suspect from a radical point of view. Some sociologists claim that the town's elite may promote `localism' to service the needs of capital and hide local class inequality. Others, however, note that 'localism' may be a liberating force that promotes change because it highlights the economic and social inequalities between a locality and elsewhere.
The focus on `community' and `localism' has brought labour historians into contact with local historians. Both local history and labour history have strong non-academic traditions, with participants expressing their sense of place in local history and feelings of solidarity and struggle in labour history. For labour historians examining a particular location, local historians provide important `local knowledge' and preserve material culture. The Lithgow and District Historical Society, for example, publishes a series of occasional monographs on issues such as local church history, industrial development, and biographies of local identitiesand the Society runs `Eskbank House', a historic house, which stores an important collection of local artefacts and manuscripts.
Both local historians and labour historians face critics who are sceptical about the value of focusing on particular towns, suburbs and cities. Andrew Metcalfe has argued that studies of communities in industrial capitalist societies have dismembered `their subject matter to allow concentration on "isolable totalities"'. These communities cannot be isolated from developments at the state, national and international level, where important decisions are made. This is not disputed. `Localism' does not prevent locals searching for solutions to problems outside their particular space. The external environment may have a significant impact. Locals may seek state or federal legislation to redress grievances. They will try to find solutions that best meet their local interests during periods of economic crisis or an industrial dispute. Further, some localities such as Broken Hill and Newcastle may be significant in their own right. They may be the centre of key national industries or a centre for radical politics. As Ellem and Shields have shown studies of particular localities provide an arena for generalisations based on national events and theoretical perspectives to be tested. Further, locality studies provide insights at a more detailed level of analysis that may not be picked up at the broader national level.
Labour historians and local historians can also contribute to broader debate by combining several town studies and increasing their explanatory power. Weston Bate, who published a history of the Melbourne suburb of Brighton, noted in 1970 that `the development of a typology of towns and the more systematic treatment of regions can help us achieve wider perspectives'. An example of this can be seen in the work of Shelton Stromquist, a US labour historian. He attempted to show that there were differences in strikes among smaller communities by examining the high level of industrial conflict on the United States railways during the last decades of the nineteenth century. Stromquist distinguished between `market cities' and `railway towns'. He examined Burlington, Iowa, as an example of the former, and Creston, Iowa, as an example of the latter. Burlington proceeded railway development and had a broad economic base. Burlington's elite identified closely with the railway and its prosperity grew as the railway expanded. Railway workers were dispersed within a larger community and received minimal community support in industrial disputes. Creston, the railway town, depended on the railway for its existence. The town's elite were retailers, whose prosperity depended on the railway freight rates. They were concerned with the railway company's monopoly power and sympathised with striking railway workers, who formed a sizeable group in the town and had considerable purchasing power.
The thematic section in this issue increases the explanatory power of concepts such as `community' and `localism' by reviewing these concepts and comparing six regional centres in New South Wales and Queensland over varying time periods. The localities examined are Dungog, Lithgow, Ipswich, Port Kembla, Broken Hill and Wagga Wagga. None of these towns had a population of more than 30,000 during the periods examined and their economic and social development varies, allowing an opportunity to develop typologies. They include the small rural community of Dungog, the major agricultural centre of Wagga Wagga, the mining town of Broken Hill and industrial Lithgow, whose leaders hoped would become the `Birmingham of Australia'.
This thematic section arose from several meetings of the Labour History and Locality Research Group, which was sponsored by the Australian Centre for Industrial Relations Research and Training at the University of Sydney. It members are labour historians drawn from the disciplines of industrial relations and history. One member was given the task of developing a theoretical overview to stimulate debate within the group. An earlier draft of this theoretical overview was circulated within the group. While the other members of the group were allowed to pursue a particular theme in their case study, they had to try and address the following issues to provide a basis for comparison:-
(i) What is the economic basis of the particular locality?
(ii) What is the basis of the formal and informal household economy?
(iii) What is the composition of the workforce?
(iv) What is the nature of gender and class relations in these localities?
(v) What form does social and labour mobilisation take?
(vi) How is community and local identity constructed?
Lucy Taksa presents the conceptual overview of `community', highlighting the ideological ambiguity of the concept of `community', which can evoke a sense of belonging and a sense of exclusion. She challenges the traditional assumptions of harmony and equilibrium associated with `community': communities can be fluid and operate at several different levels. In addition, Taksa links the debate over community with the growing interest in the politics of identity, with its notions of multiple identities and conflicting loyalties.
Glenda Strachan, Ellen Jordan and Hilary Carey examine women's work in the rural community of Dungog and its surrounding region during the last two decades of the nineteenth century. They established a computer data base drawn from a wide range of sources, including parish registers and newspapers, to reconstruct family life. The relationship of women to the family economy was largely determined by their relationship to their father and husband. This pre-industrial setting contrasts to the industrialisation of other case studies in this thematic section. The authors document the valuable contribution made by Dungog women to social infrastructure through unpaid voluntary work. Their labour was crucial to raise the necessary funds for the building of the local hospital, schools, School of Arts and Masonic lodge. This voluntary work has been unfortunately dismissed by labour historians as unproductive.
Greg Patmore examines `localism' in Lithgow. Unlike Dungog, Lithgow's origins did not lie in the development of the agricultural and pastoral industries. The arrival of the railway in the Lithgow valley in 1869 led to the opening of the coal mines and rapid industrialisation. The rapid development of the town, and inadequate public infrastructure, led to the formation of local progress associations and eventual municipal incorporation in 1889. However, this economic base was fragile and there were continued efforts to maintain and attract industry. Localism helps explain why business people support workers during industrial disputes and underpin the formation of labour-community coalitions. Localism provides insights into the fragmentation of labour organisation. Workers organise on a local rather than a national basis and support independent local candidates rather than Labor Party candidates. The local labour market is influenced by localism because it fosters local preference in employment practices and denies jobs to `outsiders' during periods of unemployment.
Bradley Bowden in his study of Ipswich highlights how relationships within a community can be fluid and in disequilibrium. While Ipswich developed a broad industrial base like Lithgow, unlike Lithgow its origins lay in the development of agriculture and pastoralism. Tensions between a growing industrial workforce and the established elite, which centred on two families and derived its wealth from retailing, erupted in the 1912 general strike and ultimately led Ipswich to increasingly take on the appearance of a `labour town'. Within this `labour town', however, tensions remained between a number of distinct working class communities.
Erik Eklund focuses on the town of Port Kembla, where industrialisation was assisted by the construction of a harbour by the state government during the early decades of this century. Eklund notes the development of two types of politics in Port Kembla - local politics and class politics. Local politics is based on calls for unity and emphasises progress and development through town-based organisations such as progress associations. An important site for local politics was the main street, where women especially were involved by shopping and socialising. Eklund argues that class politics arises from the tensions between organised local labour and management. Class politics are most evident in the workplace, particularly during industrial disputes.
Bradon Ellem and John Shields examine the isolated mining community of Broken Hill during the interwar period. They challenge the neglect of the town's history during the two decades following the 18 month long strike of 1919-20, when Broken Hill became truly a `union town'. The Barrier Industrial Council, the union peak body in the town, conducted successful campaigns to unionise town employees and extend control over local commodity supplies and production. In Broken Hill the union movement emphasised class affiliation rather than a sense of community, directly challenging the petit-bourgeoisie. While the unions were successful in class terms, their victory was deeply gendered. Local unions organised single women in the paid workforce, but forced married women out of paid employment. While women supported union membership campaigns, they successfully resisted union-sponsored efforts to establish co-operatives as this challenged women's autonomy in household spending and consumption.
Warwick Eather examines Wagga Wagga in the period from 1940 to 1975. He argues that Wagga Wagga, which had little manufacturing activity and derived its wealth from the agricultural and pastoral industries of the surrounding Riverina, was a very conservative city. Entrepreneurs, graziers, farmers and professionals formed an elite, which dominated municipal politics and was generally hostile to the labour movement. During the period under examination Eather argues that the labour movement struggled to maintain a presence in the city. Particularly in the climate of the cold war, communists and militant trade unionists were isolated and ostracised. Eather reinforces the idea that communities may embrace and support some individuals or groups but exclude others who do not fit into the local `way of life'.
Elizabeth Faue notes in her postscript that since the 1960s, both Australian and US labour historiographies have shifted their focus towards a broader history of the working class. However, both have neglected spatial analysis. Faue draws upon US labour historiography to bring together the major issues examined in this collection of essays.
Overall, this thematic section strengthens our understanding of town and city life in regional Australia by bringing together six different case studies that span over 100 years of Australian history. In contrast to single authored studies, which may at best give insights into two or three communities, this collection allows a greater coverage and recognition of the diversity of experience in regional Australia. Moreover, these essays highlight the vitality of Australian labour history, which has broadened its focus away from the `labour problematic'. The interest in `community' is pushing labour historians to further examine workers' lives beyond the workplace and to establish a dialogue with local historians. It is hoped that the papers in this thematic section will stimulate further research and encourage more manuscripts on these issues to be submitted to Labour History.
Greg patmore is the editor of Labour History and teaches industrial relations and labour history at Sydney University. He is currently undertaking research into the history of Lithgow and also a comparative study of the steel industry in this town and Sydney, Nova Scotia during the period 1899-1932. He and Mark Hearn are joint convenors of the Federation and Working Life Project, which has been funded by the National Council for the Centenary of federation.
by The Chaser
"We need to be on guard," said resort manager Shavi Mahatma, who was keen to stress that, despite his name, he is not Indian.
"Great Keppel is very vulnerable right now. People resent our wide range of water activities, the incredible nightlife and competitive weekend packages."
Resort management has taken immediate precautions against a rebel attack, by erecting barricades made out of small cocktail umbrellas. It is also seeking to marshal an impromptu naval defence force, comprising hire catamarans and windsurfers.
Assistance has also been offered by the Club Med resort on nearby Lindeman Island, which has sent its Entertainment Crew to ward off rebels by singing "Agadoo".
Region analysts say the Whitsundays has not experienced such upheaval since "A Current Affair" ambushed the Paxtons on South Mole.
The instability has already caused a small drop-off in tourism, forcing some island resorts to wind down their facilities. "We've stopped all our activities except for the table tennis," admitted Daydream Island boss Ken Davies. "Actually, that's the only activity we ever have."
Guests on Great Keppel Island say the threat of civil unrest has definitely put a dampener on their holiday. "We came here to get wrecked, sure," said holidaymaker Justin Owens. "But not quite that wrecked."
"People are scared to go out and play volleyball, or enjoy an exotic daiquiri in the novelty pool bar. No one's even rooted a member of staff yet."
Resort management says it has been trying to get in contact with the Defence Department, to arrange an HMAS frigate to take guests off the island - for snorkeling excursions to the reef. "We've asked for a glass-bottom frigate," said Mr Mahatma. "With a good open deck for coits."
by Zoe Reynolds
A new photo exhibition has opened at the Theatreworks in Melbourne. It is called Barricade. And it is not only the work community radio personality, street worker, photographer and one time wharfie, Denis Evans - it is the work of a community.
Unlike the play or the book or the paintings, commemorating the Patrick Dispute, Barricade is the work of an artist with his feet planted firmly among the workers.
It not a middle class attempt to portray a working class struggle. Denis was rallying the community over the airwaves and down on the wharves as one of the crowd, not a mere observer.
His working class credentials are impeccable. Denis Evans, son of a wharfie, started out as an underage labourer on Melbourne's Appleton Dock, aged 15. He went on to become a trade union official for the Liquor and Hospitality Workers, then the Food Preservers, then the Transport Workers - 20 years in all.
Now, and at the time of the dispute, Denis was chairperson of community radio 3CR and a street worker caring for the homeless. "During the dispute 3CR broadcast 24 hours," he recalls.
"We put out a call to get people down on the picket and everyone came from everywhere - up to 7,000 people - community activists, teachers labourers, ethnic groups, Turkish and Lebanese workers, the God Squad..."
What happened next was among the more remarkable events of the dispute. The unionists and community collectively transformed the picket.
"People started collecting the iron rails that were just lying around, torn up and abandoned by train tracks," said Denis. "They carried them back to the picket, creating what we called a community art work."
The heavy iron rails, weighed in at around 500 pounds each, requiring the collective muscle of around a dozen people to lift and lug them to the picket.
"That's what I found so inspiring," said Denis. "It was a community effort." The rails were then soldered together, so nothing could could get in or out of the wharves.
The 'work of art' as it became known, was actually the brainwave of branch official John Higgins and a bunch of metal and construction workers. But it could just as well have been Christo.
Site art first emerged in the late 1960's as a reaction to the growing commercialisation of the art world.
Artists rebelled against a market in which art had become merely a commodity. Their art began as a model of dissent in a climate of political upheaval and social change. It was a time when accepted practices in many areas of life came under scrutiny.
People questioned the growing capitalist market influence within the art world in an era where art had become a commodity to be traded and bought. Urban community artists believed that operating within the market system meant the corruption and prostitution of the artist.
With these rebellions in mind, site artists began making works that restored the social function of art, through participatory and interactive art works, engaging the community and public space. The new emphasis was on collective and plural artworks.
Christo's works are legendary for this. Bulgarian born, Christo inherited the social and economic values of communism. He embraced the idea that art should not be private property. To Christo art belonged to the people.
Whole communities would become involved through the physical dynamism and enthusiasm of the projects. His works were a collective, communal activity.
Denis Evans' photos document the creation of the workers' art project which united the community and the workers enabling them, ultimately, to win a landmark battle.
His photos capture rows of men and women grasping the steel railway lines like rope in the tug of war for the wharves.
The main photo also records that memorable dawn in April, when 2000 construction workers marched to the rescue of a picket under siege.
"I'll never forget it," says Denis. "I've worked in the Balkans at the height of the war filing live for 3CR and it was nothing compared to the fear we all felt that night - hundreds of police, helicopters buzzing overhead shining spotlights onto us. I felt safer in Kosovo, than in Melbourne that evening. We didn't know what was going to happen. It was eerie."
It was pre-dawn when mounted police with dogs and full riot gear, 1000 strong, converged on the picket. The crowd, 3000 strong, stood their ground, linking arms bunching up, clasping fingers, making a solid human barricade. The unionists observed one minute silence. An ambulance waited nearby.
But the anticipated conflict, never took place. Just at the pickets darkest hour 2000 chanting construction workers marched from behind the police lines trapping them in a pincer movement between the picket and the rally. The police surrendered. "Get us out of here" they pleaded. The construction workers parted, the police retreated and the cry "MUA here to Stay" filled the dawn.
"They sent in the biggest, most burly coppers they could find that night to pull apart the barricade," said Denis. "They were at it all night breaking through the solder. You could hear them. By morning they were absolutely buggered, they could not do anything else, anyway. The photo of the policemen sitting in the gutter says it all."
Barricade is a metaphor for working class unity. It portrays the determination of the workers, hard as steel, the solidarity, like solder used to weld the rails and reinforce the human barricade. Arms interlocked to defeat battalions of police, steel soldered, flesh fused - an impenetrable barricade against all who tried to cross the picket or disperse the crowd.
Denis decided to become a photographer 15 years ago so he could keep a history of industrial disputes and record the wars he covered abroad. He has no formal training - 'couldn't even read a manual'. But he does use a professional camera, a Nikon, a keen eye and a lot of soul. "What moved me about the Patrick Dispute was the principle at stake," says Denis.
"Everyone should have that right to be in a union. And if there was anything won out of the dispute it was that - the right to belong to a union without a Mr Howard or a Mr Reith coming along and sacking you."
Barricade, an exhibition of 26 photographs of the Patrick Dispute, Theatre Works, 14 Acland Street, St Kilda, June 14-July 1.
It is a pleasure to speak at a New South Wales ALP Conference in the presence of a captured audience obliged to treat a pair of old stalwarts like John Benson and myself with respect.
That is a code for no heckling. And to continue with my reputation for balance and fairness, I will reciprocate by not ordering a locking of the doors for a division.
When thinking about putting together a few words this evening, I was of course tempted to use the opportunity to rewrite a bit of history and take a lounge chair view of the labor movement of yesteryear and maybe even pine for some of the old times.
I would rather use the opportunity for a frank appraisal of where the labor movement is at, or to borrow that overused work benchmark the current labor movement against its modern history in terms of meeting the future challenges.
And in thinking closely about it, a positive story emerges.
In New South Wales we are in the middle equivalent of the wran years. A strong and disciplined Carr Government and an Opposition Leader's office with a revolving door.
The party's capacity to constantly re-create itself in a changing environment is perhaps best exemplified in the creation of Country Labor.
There is no doubt the electorate's experiment with One Nation has given way to a great opportunity for any political party to give voice to concerns outside of the metropolitan area.
Whereas the National Party have adopted a strategy of duplicating or attempting to out extreme One Nation, Country Labor is actually delivering on ones concerns.
Some of the smiles on the Country Labor MPs following the recent budget are a case in hand. Funnily enough people outside of Sydney also want decent hospitals, schools and infrastructure.
It is all pretty simple bread and butter stuff. Labor will get more long-term loyalty from improving a school in country New South Wales than belting one of our many minority groups.
In New South Wales, the challenge is one of momentum.
Federally, Labor is in a most interesting period in the electoral cycle. That delicate point where the ball can be dropped or power achieved.
During my time in the laboir movement it is interesting to compare exactly where we are now, compared to other points in our modern history.
We are getting close to five years of being in opposition.
Lets flick back to the same point following the defeat of the Chifley Government in 1949.
All of us know this was perhaps the most tortuous period in our own history, and at least equalling the conscription debate in World War I.
I certainly am not going to revisit the details, but as ugly as the whole episode was for the participants, it left a 23-year scar on the mind of the electorate.
Five years out from Curtin or five years out from Keating and i know which i prefer.
Despite some good times I had in the fifties, sixties and particularly the seventies, I now jump to 1980.
Five years out from the defeat of Whitlam in 1975 and the ALP had undergone considerable rehabilitation.
The party persevered with a defeated prime minister for a further two years. The party drifted for two years. A mistake, but a lesson learned.
Unfortunately for Bill Hayden, it all came together under Hawke in 1983.
In 1980 the party did not have the look of a winner about it.
In the year 2000 we are the same point in the cycle.
In this case we have been through one where the party far exceeded even its own optimistic expectations.
It is now seen as a very credible alternative and there is a noticeable mood shift in the electorate, assisted let me add by the performance of Labor in New South Wales.
In summary, we have gone from a 23-year period of non-government to eight years to what I think will be a maximum of six years by the time the next election is held.
This change is no accident, as I dare say all the party officers remind you.
So in all, it is a rather rosy picture and perhaps I should now just sit down.
But the very thing that keeps the party strong is its capacity to handle (some would say manage) the tensions.
Let's start with the relationship with the trade unions.
It is very much the "New Labor" approach to demark the relationship. It looks good publicly.
That approach not only ignores our history, but separates the party from the core goals of a responsible trade union.
And a trade union is about improving the lot of working people. A simple goal and one often lost to the public.
More workers vote than employers, so why should the party be shy about its relationship!!! In fact is should trade off it to a greater extent.
There is no doubt the capacity of the Hawke/Keating Government to harness the cooperation of the union movement was a fundamental key for its success. And I am not just talking bout affiliation fees.
The trade union movement delivered on the key economic reforms in the eighties and nineties that opened the Australian economy to competitive forces. These forces were kept at bay in the past by protective forces such as tariffs.
Whilst I yearn for the days of certainty when an industry doing it tough could be saved by another tariff, as an export orientated country, we get belted by such actions these days.
I do not embrace the global economy, I accept it.
Whilst John Howard claims credit for Australia surviving the Asian economies meltdown, actually pay real credit to the accord process.
This view may well be out of fashion within the labour movement, but if Labor had dealt a different set of cards to Australia during these years we would be feeling greater repercussions.
Ah but all will tell you union membership would have gone up.
I am not so sure.
I would rather focus on some of the opportunities the unions missed during this period.
Superannuation was a union goal, but became a government initiative. Fair enough, but a membership drive should have accompanied it.
More importantly, the union movement needed to subject itself to the very principles of award restructuring it so effectively negotiated with employers following the 1989 national wage case decision.
Employers made considerable efficiency gains through this decision and others that followed during the 1990s.
It is actually worth having a look at some of these principles some 11 years on, has made a significant impact on how work is performed in this country at the same time, introduced the concept of career paths, skills based classification structures and consultative mechanisms.
In short, smart employers became more competitive through properly using and promoting the skills and contributions of its workforce.
Again, the smart employers were rewarded for changing the way they did business.
Therefore, how smart is the ideologically driven ventures of Peter Reith and the federal government in inciting the return of draconian industrial relations? Do these people want to rewrite history, or are they more comfortable living in the dark ages??
You cannot ignore the benefit of the commitment in respect of a system of conciliation and arbitration has delivered to Australia.
For a country needing to attract overseas investment in order to grow, what better selling point than a system that generates the improbability of a protracted industrial disputation.
Imagine playing the State of Origin without a referee. Although I have heard that recently proposed in Queensland.
Whilst labor in government is the icing on the movement's cake, we need to nurture the substance otherwise we give way to my next problem.
And that is essentially the creation of a labour movement where the icing is the only thing attractive.
In many ways this phenomena today explains some of the contrived factions on sub-factions that now exist in the labour movement.
Please do not get me wrong. I support the faction system. I talk here of a factional system that is based on some form of ideology.
Whilst I am loathe to term Country Labor as a faction, I applaud its capacity to promote a certain viewpoint within the party. I urge all to look towards it.
Where I do have a problem is a grouping devoid of any other motive than self-promotion and often at the cost of the "real" faction or the greater party.
Squeezed between my optimism and I hope mild criticism is the capacity of the movement to deliver the prime ministership to Kim Beazley.
Is it capable after only one election defeat of securing government?
The answer is clearly yes.
I would also draw your attention to another significant milestone and that will come in January. Bob Carr will become the longest serving Labor leader.
It is a tribute to the man who rebuilt the Parliamentary Labor Party from a crushing defeat into the most successful Labor machine in our history.
John Benson's speech will be published next week
I mean why do I feel like a supermarket customer when I go and have a bet nowadays? Where's the people with stories to tell and schemes to dream? No, instead we get media hype with blow arses like Sandy Roberts or Ray Warren full of their own self-importance who are besotted with the sound of their own voice.
Bring back the warmth of the lovable rogues and colourful Sydney racing identities - the good old bad old days. I can see the post-mod, hip media gurus sneering ironically over their skim double decaf lattes saying that this bloke has got a terminal case of nostalgia simply because he can't hack the present. I can hack the present all right - just present me with carving knife and I'll hack out all crap that's thrown down the media tubes at me with the utmost zeal and pleasure.
Sadly most punters out there won't even know what I'm talking about so in the interests of inter-generational cross-cultural education I'd like to present to the poor unfortunate media victims out there with a brief roll call of the beautiful people that once made Sydney the big sexy tainted tart it was once was and sadly is no more.
"Bumper" Farrell - Newton Bluebags prop forward, Kings Cross policeman and the original owner of the classic "cauliflower ear". Bumper epitomised the rough head copper who dealt out justice to errant youths with a "swift kick up the arse." Bumper's other claim to fame was chewing the ear of one of his opponents in a scrum one day - don't know what the Tyson fuss was all about, Bumper did it years before and got away with it.
Bob "The Baron" Skelton - Big betting owner/trainer from Sydney's notorious 'Pony' tracks in the 1920's and 30's. Probably his best rort was booking a seemingly no name jockey for one of his plunges, after returning to scale it emerged that the victorious jockey was the Jim Cassidy of his generation that changed his name by deed poll earlier in the week. Clever.
Dr Reginald Stuart-Jones - Abortionist racketeer and playboy nightclub owner who made Geoffrey Edlesten look like a pansy. Loved nothing better than getting slaughtered on the drink with a bunch of crims at a Surry Hills pub, after a day out at the track, and firing off a few rounds into the ceiling from one of his revolvers. Apparently didn't bulk bill.
Frederick Charles "Paddles" Anderson - Tragically misunderstood gambling heavy of the 1950's and 60's who humbly described himself before the courts as a "machinist from Surry Hills". Reputedly hung a leading Sydney jockey out of a skyscraper window by his ankles in the late 70's for winning on one of Paddles' horses when the money wasn't on. Reported to be a model neighbour who always bought Christmas presents for the kiddies.
George David Freeman - Harmless SP Bookmaker who liked going to the races with chief Stipendiary Magistrates. Somehow managed to tip horses with a 98 percent success rate without having to study the form. Reports that he paid off jocks to organise 'boat' races and had a regular lunch date with a leading Sydney racing official are purely coincidental and fictit