Housekeepers at the Olympic Village |
Labor Council's Unions 2000 coordinator Chris Christodoulou says unions are still dealing with pay problems and expect to lodge legal proceedings in the NSW Industrial Relations Commission next week.
The unresolved matters include late payments from a number of companies associated with the Olympic Labor Network, a series unfair dismissal and claims for breach of employment contracts.
Unions 2000 and affiliate unions are planning to lodge all outstanding matter with the IRC next week.
"The Games workforce did a terrific job, it's a pity that some employers are not fulfilling their part of the bargain," Christodoulou says.
"Many of the claims deal with issue of workers who say they have worked on a particular day but where no records or time sheets can be found.
"In these cases more examination needs to occur to convince employers that it is their own maladministration that has caused the problem."
Christodoulou stresses that SOCOG has been cooperating with Unions 2000 in all the outstanding matters.
And he says Unions 2000 is keeping an eye on the Olympic pay bonus, which is due to be paid to thousands of Olympic workers at the end of this month.
A bid for National Rail by NSW rail freight operator FreightCorp has been ruled out by the Federal Government. But Labor Council secretary Michael Costa says he's committed to securing the best possible future for FreightCorp's 2,200 workers in light of the pending sale of National Rail.
"What I don't want to see is FreightCorp decimated by unfair competition from a privately owned National Rail, " Costa says.
The Rail, Tram and Bus Union has conducted research on the best possible options for job protection for FreightCorp workers One of their preferred options is for FreightCorp to buy National Rail.
But in the event that can't take place, the other option would be to pursue the parallel sale of FreightCorp and National Rail - creating a large and competitive rail freight business that can take the fight up to road transport.
"I don't want to move to 'Plan B' before we have investigated the chances of turning the Federal Government decision around in the courts if necessary," Costa says.
A study done by PriceWaterhouseCoopers for the RTBU found the biggest threat to FreightCorp jobs would be to just "stand and fight" against a privatised National Rail.
"This option would cost 600 jobs within a year as the new operator cherry picks FreightCorp's most valuable contracts," Mr Costa said.
"The NSW Labor Council will not cop an option that decimates rail jobs across country New South Wales."
The ACTU has called on the Howard Government to support groundbreaking international sanctions against the Burmese Government over its tolerance of slave labour.
ACTU president Sharan Burrow says Australia's position will be an important test of its ongoing commitment to international human rights.
The International Labour Organisation is expected to announce a decision next week on a complaint against Burma, sponsored by the International Council of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU).
If supported, the ILO could for the first time invoke punitive powers such as the withdrawal of investment
The Burma case is being viewed as an important test of the international community's ability to enforce core labour standards such as prohibitions of child labour and slave labour.
Small Steps Not Enough
The ICFTU has urged the International Labour Organization (ILO) and international community to take swift punitive actions against the Burmese junta for failing to curb forced labour in Burma.
The ILO gave an ultimatum to the regime in June this year to comply with its recommendations to eliminate forced labour in the country by November 30. The ILO's governing body is at present meeting in Geneva to decide how far Burmese regime has done in complying with the recommendations.
On Tuesday, Burmese Deputy Foreign Minister Khin Maung Win told AFP that his government had issued a directive on November 1 banning forced labour in the country. "The order has been posted in every police station in the country," said Khin Maung Win.
Burmese activists, however, say that the government's directive lacks the necessary specifics and it will not have any immediate effect on the widespread forced labour, which is being carried out by the military officers in the village and township levels, particularly in the border areas of the country.
by Wayne Patterson
Under the voucher proposals, students enrolled in public schools with poor results in standardised tests would be eligible for vouchers which could be used to pay fees in private schools.
The American doctrine of the separation of church and state has largely prevented direct government funding of private schools. Vouchers are seen by many as a means of circumventing this doctrine by providing government funds to students' families. Families could then choose to spend their vouchers on private schools.
The voucher proposals were strongly opposed by American teacher unions which argued the proposals would siphon funds from needy schools and marginalise schools in disadvantaged areas by encouraging the flight of students from middle class families.
Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush supported the voucher proposals; Democratic candidate Al Gore opposed them. Despite school funding being largely a responsibility of state and local governments, education was a major issue in the presidential race.
The voucher proposals were the subject of referendums in Michigan and California where issues can be placed on the ballot by petition. The Michigan proposal also included mandatory testing of teachers in their subject area. The California proposal would have limited state and local authority to require private schools to meet standards, including state academic requirements and limited future health, safety, zoning, and building restrictions on private schools.
Voucher proposals in both states were backed by wealthy conservatives, a venture capitalist in California and the founder of Amway Corporation in Michigan.
The AWU and the other steel unions say the company has broken an agreement over consultation about contracting out and fear BHP's plan will kill up to 800 jobs.
AWU National President Graham Roberts says BHP had already made up its mind about contracting out before they talked to the workforce.
'The fundamental issue is job security,' he said. 'We have been abiding by agreements since 1983, starting with the steel plan. All of these agreements were about people being employed in well-paid satisfying jobs. There was a commitment from BHP to the Illawarra to continue to provide jobs to the Illawarra.'
The Port Kembla is the latest in a running battle between the Big Australian and its workers in steel, iron ore and coal as BHP executives increasingly adopt American-style anti-union tactics.
Port Kembla workers have committed to a public campaign to highlight the effects of the latest plan on jobs and the local economy, the efforts of union members over two decades to ensure an internationally competitive steel industry and the lack of commitment at the highest levels of the company to steel making in Australia.
by Mark Morey
|
Phil Naylor, CEO of the Australian Retailers Association, is now claiming that the ARA is "supportive of the accreditation and labelling systems" which were developed by the FairWear alliance of church and trade unions
But Naylor has stated that the ARA will review the Fair Wear's concerns and consult his members before clarifying ARA's position. Fair Wear is expecting a formal response from the ARA by 20 November.
On Monday, the Fair Wear Coalition held a protest outside the Grace Bros City story and then marched to the Australian Retailers Association (ARA). The aim of the protest was to highlight the ARA back flip and refusal to keep their word and abide by the commitment they made to the Homeworkers Code of Practice.
In response to the Homeworkers Code of Practice Committee finalising the tools to monitor the Code, which will provide real improvements in wages for outworkers, the Australian Retailers Association (ARA) stated that it would no longer be participating in the Code of Practice. In a bid to have the ARA change its position, the Fair Wear Coalition held a vocal and well attended protest to highlight the last minute back flip by the ARA.
Debbie Carstens, Coordinator of Fair Wear, stated, "Most major retailers had signed the Homeworkers Code of Practice, but it appeared to be nothing more than an exercise to save their public image. Monitoring of the Code is about to begin, and the ARA, on behalf of its members has said they will have nothing to do with the accountability procedures of the Code".
Dr Alastair Greig, a senior lecturer in sociology from the Australian National University addressed the rally and highlighted the importance of ARA's continued support of the Code stating, "Without an effective Homeworkers Code of Practice, adhered to by all major players in the clothing industry, homeworkers will continue to be among the most exploited members of the Australian workforce".
Other speakers included Tony Woolgar, National Secretary of the Textile Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia and Debbie Carstens who challenged the ARA to return to their commitment to abide by the Code of Practice.
The Stellar call center worker, an activist with the Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU), returned from a week off to be told she had only had three of the five days officially authorized.
The CPSU's Stephen Jones says the action by Stellar management - an offshoot of telstra - amounts to a clear case of victimization of a union activist.
Jones says the woman has been one of the lynchpins of an organizing campaign that has seen the CPSU sign up more than 50 per cent of the Gold Coast workplace in the last six months.
Melinda Maddox has been with the Stellar callcentre in Robina on the Gold Coast for more than 12 months. She is a popular 50-year-old mother of two who has received numerous commendations for the standard of her work.
The CPSU lodged a claim for reinstatement with Stellar today and will be looking at pursuing court action if she is not given her job back.
Earlier this week, the a government-funded tourism survey found that 40 per cent of employees took no annual leave last year. When questioned, the majority of those surveyed said they would prefer to fave their leave as their employment was insecure.
FSU state secretary Geoff Derrick says the union will focus on whether the bank is breaching the federal Workplace Relations Act's freedom of association provisions by offering a better deal to managers who sign contracts.
In a letter to managers, ANZ CEO John MacFarlane has informed the workers that they would only be able to access to the bank's bonus scheme if they signed the contracts. And as a sweetener, the ANZ has offered 750 share options on signing the contracts
"By putting a deadline for accepting the contracts of just three weeks before a new collective agreement is due for negotiation, ANZ ghas made it clear that they are doing this to lock managers out of collective bargaining," Derrick says.
"If successful, then the 4,500 effected employees would be denied across the board pay increases, together with all the protections of the Federal EDA and all but the basic provisions of the award."
Interim Deal at Commonwealth
Meanwhile, Commonwealth Bank staff have had a victory of sorts with the bank granting a three per cent over-award pay increase to all workers.
The pay increase comes as the bank indicated it would continue to talk to the FSU about a collective agreement after its individual contracts strategy met fierce opposition from staff.
The Community and Public Sector Union scored 35 new members a Cup Day bonus at Primus of $30 per hour after a grassroots campaign by those forced to work on Cup Day, which is in Victoria a public holiday.
The CPSU collected more than 150 signatures from workers angry about the Cup Day and got more than 50 workers to vote in favour of taking industrial action against the company earlier the week.
CPSU assistant secretary Stephen Jones says the win had added spark to the organizing campaign throughout Primus, which is a leading supply of IT services, to companies including Virtual Communtiies (the ACTU's computer venture).
"The end result is we recruited 35 new members out of a three-day campaign. We have high union visibility in a company that was un-unionised three months ago," Jones says
by Andrew Casey
" If they win the result is a meals on wheels service at the Country Club Casino," Darren Mathewson, Tasmanian LHMU Branch Secretary, said.
" If the kitchen is out-sourced food will be delivered to the Country Club door, and then re-heated for visitors.
" Is that really the quality we want to project for Tasmanian hospitality?, " Darren Mathewson asked.
The Mulawa Group - the company which owns the Tasmanian Casinos, numerous hotels and network gaming - wants a win in the kitchens of the Country Club Casino as a first stage in a plan to outsource jobs in other departments, then Wrest Point and other hotels they operate.
The Mulawa Group is a Sydney-based company which last year had revnues reaching $212 million - a rise of 14.5%.
LHMU members and supporters are being asked to send protest e-mails to Greg Farrell, the Managing Director of the Mulawa Group.
Tell the company that the restructure of the kitchens is not good for Tasmanian tourism's growing world-wide reputation; not good for the reputation of the Launceston Country Club Casino - and it is a disaster when it comes to the jobs of union members.
Use the Web to give the Managing Director, Greg Farrell, some of your advice, and tell him about union solidarity. E-mail Greg Farrell: [email protected]
And don't forget to tell the Hotel and Casino workers of Tasmania that they are not alone.
Please send messages of solidarity, and copies of any e-mail messages you sent to the company, to the LHMU Tasmanian branch secretary . E-mail Darren Mathewson: [email protected]
Management at the Country Club Casino have outlined plans to close the main kitchen and contract out pastry, cold larder, soups and sauces - they want it to start next week."
The equivalent of ten full-time staff will be made redundant by this plan.
"If management gets away with contracting-out in Launceston we will see similar cutbacks at the Wrest Point Casino in Hobart . Mulawa Group try to use the same management model at all their sites, so if Launceston is allowed to get away with it we can expect it to happen elsewhere.
" Our members don't want to cop these changes. It's time we got together to work out what to do. The management at Launceston Country Club Casino offered us no wage rises when we went into enterprise bargaining - now they want to cut our jobs."
In correspondence to the Labor Council, O'Sullivan has dubbed the workers main accuser, Southern Highlands MP Peta Seaton 'the Patron Saint of Feral Animals'.
"The emotional ferment whipped up about the aerial culling of feral horses in the Guy Fawkes River National Park has been most unfairly and unjustly to condemn a body of people who are the finest servants of this State," O'Sullivan says.
"Horses are loved in Australia and this is a feeling that is not monopolised by the Member for Southern Highlands, Ms Seaton. So are dogs loved in Australia. So are cats loved in Australia. However, when cats go feral the damage they do to native fauna is horrific and therfe is no outcry when feral cats are culled. Neither is there an outcry when feral dogs are culled. Primary producers value their pigs and many of us value port, yet we encourage the culling of feral pigs. I don't hear many people condemning this. I don't hear many people condemning the culling of rabbits, whilst at the same time we may refer to them as bunny rabbits, nice and cuddly. Nevertheless the damage they do is well known.
"The National Parks people who cull feral animals do so humanely and do so without any great enjoyment. The same applies to culling wild horses, which are doing incredible damage in some National Parks. I have listened to the Member for Southern Highlands talk about dropping some food which would make wild horses sexually impotent. However, she appears to fail to realise that it is not wild horses' testicles or ovaries that are damaging the Parks it is their hooves.
It" is less than impressive for members of the community with a particular political bent to perpetrate and maintain a cry of horror at the thought of feral animals being culled. To whip this into an emotional frenzy in attacking decent, good and altruistic officers in National Parks is beyond the pale. Instead of talking and shouting about legal action against NPWS Officers it may be much more honest to commend them for their wonderful contribution to the native beauty of this State over so many years.
"I wonder what Ms Seaton would say if it was on farms that animals were culled (eg horses, goats, pigs, rabbits, emus, kangaroos, wombats, etc.). Her party is notoriously silent on this.
"If the Member for Southern Highlands wishes to appoint herself as the Patron Saint of Feral Animals, then let her do so. However, it will be a patronage not conferred by canonisation and not conferred by vox populi."
So there.
|
NSW Labor Council secretary Michael Costa last night encouraged all union affiliates to attend the street rally.
"The Labor Council supports South Sydney supporters, not because they are Souths supporters but because of the principle underpinning their claim," Costa said.
"That is, to return rugby league back to the people who have traditionally supported it, and that is the working class."
More than 50,000 people are expected to attend the Rabbitohs' rally to protest against the NRL's failure to reinstate the club in the competition.
Souths have called for all fans, regardless of club loyalties, to join the rally which will start at noon at Redfern Oval and culminate at Sydney Town Hall.
Costa said the rally was in response to another example of corporate bullies beating on the working class.
"This is a case of very large corporate entities taking over a game that traditionally has been supported by working class people and, to be brutally frank, stuffing that game up," he said.
"We want to see it returned to the rightful owners and run in a manner that people can again feel that it is their sport."
Up to 40,000 people flooded the streets in a sea of red and green during a rally on October 10 last year, five days before the foundation club was axed from the NRL.
South Sydney failed last week in its Federal Court bid for readmission to the NRL.
Appeal
But in late breaking news just before this edition was published South Sydney announced that they are appealing the decision to the full bench of the Federal Court. This decision was the result of their lawyer's recommendation that South Sydney had good grounds for appeal.
Go Petition is currently hosting a petition that demands the reinstatement of the South Sydney Rabbitohs to the national competition.
Every signature helps to donate money to Greenpeace and builds pressure on the News Ltd controlled NRL.
You can Sign the Petition by going to:
http://gopetition.com/info.php?petid=75
All Seasons Premier Menzies Hotel; 14 Carrington Street, Sydney (above Wynyard Railway Station)
Drinks 6pm - 8pm - 'Melbourne Room' Cost $45 concession available
Hotel Parking at evening rates
RSVP by 20 November to Melanie Stewart - Phone: 9230 2970 or fax your credit card details to Melanie Stewart - Fax: 9230 3043
The members of the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union will be asking reith to apologise for accusing one of their colleagues, a hotel receptionist, for stealing his Telecom pin number.
Reith made the desperate claim when details of his own family friendly initiative became public last month.
LHMU state secrteray Annie Ownes is inviting all city workers to join the rally outside Sydney's Hilton Hotel at 11am next Wednesday (November 15).
Sound Politics
Labor Council is currently preparing a special Reith musical tribute to coincide with the protest.
Songs will include Abba's 'Ring, Ring', ELO's 'Telephone Line' and Blondie's classic double "Call me' and "Hanging on the telephone".
Dear Sir,
Regarding a couple of points made in your US election coverage:
Ralph Nader is exactly the opposite of Prof. Allen Fells. Fells seeks increased consumer benefits through increased competition and removal of trade barriers. Nader seeks increased consumer benefits by regulation, and wants to impose trade barriers.
Al Gore an internationalist and George W. Bush an isolationist? Watch the third debate; Gore, a self-described "fair trader", declares himself in favour of "increased protection" and "security" for US farmers. These are, you'll recognise, code words for tariffs.
Bush, responding, announced that the way to prosperity for US farmers is "to feed the world", requiring the removal of "international trade barriers" such as tariffs.
What's up? Where are you guys getting your information these days?
Tim Blair
Dear Sir,
As an enthusiastic cyclist , and after a recent visit to the Sydney C.B.D., I feel compelled to offer my congratulations to Fearless Frank and his adventurous Council
The C.B.D of Sydney must have what are the best Bicycle Lanes in the South Pacific.
These lanes are what used to be called pavements or footpaths, but now, together with traffic islands, are the main preserve of mountain bikers, trick cyclists, cycle message boys/girls or general circus clowns.
On any day we can be watched, usually in groups, weaving through the C.B.D.. Usually leaping from road to pavement to traffic island, riding rodeo style on one wheel, doing brake turns and then leaving our bicycles across the entrances of any shop, which we may decide to make a delivery at.
Sadly, this anarchist lifestyle is a tad disrupted by the e presence of pedestrians walking on our cycle lanes. This includes old people (most whom refuse to jump out of our way as quickly as we wish), mothers with children (a real hazard), blind people with guide dogs and the handicapped.
Weekends can be extremely distressing to us, as there are more people than usual and we now have to wear padding and helmets to prevent injury to ourselves.
Perhaps Fearless Frank could employ more ordinance inspectors with his alleged savings, (I wonder where all these savings go "Rate reductions?)
These inspectors will prevent these nuisance pedestrians from interfering with our enjoyment of these nice new bicycle lanes.
We, the usually non- rate paying, law-breaking, pavement cyclists of Sydney are over the moon about our new cycle lanes but in order to fully appreciate these facilities, suggest that pedestrians respect our claim to the pavements and either stay at home, get a car and remain in it all times or buy a bicycle and join us making a chaos that harmonizes with the rest of the rest of Franks` C.B.D.
Tom Collins (with assistance and Plagiarism from Bart)
|
Such irony that the nation leading the world into the Information Age has an electoral system that is so antiquated. America, having bequeathed democracy to the rest of the world, enjoys none of the benefits of a modern electoral system itself. It will take months to determine who is to be the President and only the courts can determine the outcome.
There was high drama on election night euphoria turning to apprehension as the media flip-flopped between candidates. Around 8.00 pm, exit polls and very early figures resulted in the media calling the key State of Florida for Gore. Around 10.30 pm, new figures supporting Bush's lead had mounted, forcing the withdrawal of their prediction. The events of the night were further confused when in the small hours of the morning, it was called for Bush and again returned to the 'too close to call' category. It appears that an over-reliance on exit polls and corrupted data were to blame in the first instance, and perhaps frayed emotions and lack of sleep to blame in the second.
Under the Electoral College system all of the votes from each state are awarded to the single candidate who gains the majority of votes in that state. As such, Florida, with its twenty-five Electoral College votes, is the fourth most populous state in the US. It can swing the outcome in favour of either of the two candidates and is too close to call. Following a re-count the latest figures put Bush as little as 359 votes ahead of Gore.
The Florida poll may not be closed for ten days after the election to allow overseas postal votes to be received. Last election 2, 300 such votes were received, mostly from Military personnel. Is has been deemed that because of resentment arising from the Clinton decision to allow gays into the Military, this group is more likely to vote conservative, despite Gore having served in Vietnam. Further complicating matters is the situation in Palm Beach County, Florida.
In the US elections are conducted under State law and administered by County Administrations, an extra level of government between local and State. This means that voting systems vary depending on location. The punch card system is the most common. The voting card is inserted into the base of a machine and a stylus is used to punch-out a perforated hole in the card corresponding to the candidate of their choice.
Palm Beach, a strongly Democratic area, has produced an anomalously large vote for Pat Buchanan, running for the extreme right. At 3, 000, his vote in this area was ten times the state average and the informal vote is also running at 19, 000 significantly higher than expected. Voters are coming forward claiming that they were confused by the layout of the ballot. Furthermore, there are reports that polling officials were also unclear about the correct manor of voting.
The irregularity relates to the way in which the names were aligned. Names appeared both to the right and the left of the punch-holes, rather then to the left only which is usually the case. Bush's names appeared at the top of the ballot and corresponded to the top hole, Gore was the second name appearing on the right hand side. However Gore's name appeared next to the third punch hole and Buchanan appeared on the right hand side, corresponding to the second punch hole. The statistically anomalous outcomes, suggests that many voters who, intending to vote for Gore, accidentally voted for Bush. A large proportion of the 19, 000 informal votes were irregular because the holes corresponding to both Gore and Buchanan were both punched out indicating a high degree of voter confusion.
Given the closeness of the race, the aberration in Palm Beach County could change the result in the State and therefore the whole National election. The evidence is mounting for a court challenge. Statistical aberrations in the voting outcome, personal testimony from both voters and polling officials regarding the events of the day will all become evidence in the trial. A provision in the Florida State electoral laws, indicating that the names may only be located on the left-hand side of the punch-holes has also emerged. Florida law gives the courts wide discretion in correcting any voting irregularities and the most likely remedy would be an order to re-run the election.
Perhaps we are witnessing the genesis of a new stage in the evolutionary progression of democracy. From primaries to election proper, in the future 'the legal stage' will become a standard feature of the American electoral process. In any event the entertainment is far from over.
Other campaign highlights include the election of Hilary Clinton to the Senate, from New York, establishing her as the most high profile female politician in the country and sparking speculation regarding a 2004 run at the Presidency. There was also the successful election of Gov. Mel Carnahan, the deceased Governor of Missouri, to the Senate the Lt. Governor has indicated that he will appoint his widow, Jean Carnahan, to the position. She has made it clear that she would accept the appointment.
The Democrats have, at best, made moderate gains in both the Houses of Congress however have failed to achieve a majority in either. Depending on the final outcome in Washington State, which is currently too close to call, the Senate may be evenly split. In any case, the Republicans will be working on a very slim majority. Given that the members don't vote strictly along party lines, it means that the Congress is likely to remain grid-locked for the next for years, prohibiting any king of radical reform program from either side.
If he loses the election, Al Gore would be the unluckiest person on earth. On four levels he has been confounded in his mission to achieve the White House. Firstly, he won the popular vote by 120, 000, despite the possibility that he might lose the Electoral College vote. Secondly, the Nader effect which under a preferential system, such as is used in Australia, would ensure that the fifty percent of Nader voters who would otherwise have voted for Gore could have provided him with their second preference. This would have ensured a safe Gore victory. Thirdly, because of the lack of a centrally administered election, local authorities are responsible for the conduct of the ballot in each county potential leading to irregularities and challenges. A situation, such has occurred in Palm Beach County would be less likely.
Finally, only one-third of the American population that is eligible to vote actually does. The fifty- percent figure, used by the media for voter turnout, is the proportion of registered voters, which voted. Whilst only 70% of those that are eligible to register actually do. All the groups that are less likely to register and vote: young people, working people, lower income groups, African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Native- Americans, are disengaged from the political process. Furthermore, the bane of American politics: 'interest groups', which dominate US politics through money and mobilisation of their constituencies, often at the expense of the public interest, can be ascribed to the voluntary voting system. Since those with some sort of direct stake in the outcome are far more likely to turn out and vote, those not directly affected by government decisions, without extreme views, are unlikely to turn out.
Whatever the outcome of these elections, Australians can feel smug lucky for us; we've got Democracy Version 7.0. America is the first modern democracy but also the most antiquated. As a nation they have become too proud of their electoral system to be able to modernise it. If nothing else happens then maybe the events of Campaign 2000 will provide the impetus for them to accept an 'upgrade patch' from the rest of the world. Watch this space!
Stephen Mayne |
What is your basic modus operandi?
Well, the goal is to create a culture of shareholder pressure in Australia, which there is not, and so wherever there is a company that is performing badly, that is not being accountable for mistakes, I'll move in and put pressure on. So I might go to the AGM and ask questions or in more extreme cases actually run for their Board on a platform for change. It is all about applying pressure and forcing change through public exposure and public debate.
So for those who don't know how AGMs work, what happens?
Normally what happens is there is a brief 15 minute presentation on what a wonderful year they have had, and then they race through the re-election of directors and pay rises for directors and a big options package for the chief executive and it is all over in about half an hour. What I am trying to do is as soon as it comes to discussion on the resolutions - I start throwing in some curly questions and make the directors earn their directors' fees on the one occasion of the year where they are legally obliged to answer questions. So it is all about THIS IS YOUR DAY, SHAREHOLDER and you should make them sweat.
Give us an example of a recent AGM. I understand for instance, with the Commonwealth Bank you got a fair bit of union support?
Yes. I got 40 per cent of the YES vote at the Commonwealth Bank and I think probably about half of that was union superfunds supporting the platform which was that they should stop their cash-for-comment deal with Alan Jones and that they should become a more activist fund manager across the country. But it coincided with the unions running their anti-contract campaign and several union representatives spoke at the meeting and so I think they voted for me and I think a lot of their fellow union super funds also did as well.
What do you have to do to actually get in their and do that?
It is very easy to stand for a Board. In most cases you just need one shareholder to recommend you and then you can get your message out to the rest of the shareholders by putting information in your platform - in your CV - so it is a very, very useful distribution for your message, because legally they can't stop you standing for their Board as long as you are a shareholder.
Then, the other way to do it is to turn up at the meeting as a shareholder or proxy and get up at the appropriate moment and put the spotlight on the issues that might be concerning the union. Just get up there and ask the questions publicly. The media is all there - they are all listening. The Board is all there - the management is all there - the shareholders are all there. It is the best opportunity of the year to get a message through and apply some pressure.
How do you get a proxy?
I can't afford to buy shares in every company, so I now solicit proxies. So I say I want to go to this meeting, is there anyone out there a shareholder? Can you appoint me your proxy? And people readily send in the material and so I can go to the meeting and speak without actually having to buy the shares. And when I run for a Board, I encourage as many shareholders as possible to appoint me as their proxy, so then I can stand up and say - and in the case of the AMP - I'm speaking on behalf of 560 shareholders who have appointed me their proxy with share worth $5 million. So you have a lot more authority when you are speaking if you have got a number of people who have appointed you.
In the case of the Commonwealth Bank and the unions, the FSU had about 450,000 shares that they were speaking on behalf of. Now that is worth $15 million or something, so it gives you a lot more clout at the meeting.
The Australian Shareholders' Association at the Pacific Dunlop meeting were speaking on behalf of 5% of the company, or 30 million shares. That was a big chunk of shares and that gave them a lot more power and authority on the floor of the meeting.
What sort of response do you get when you do one of these stunts?
It varies from a chairman who handles it well and hasn't got much to hide, and who will say "It's terrific. We enjoyed the debate. Come back next year." to the likes of Frank Lowey or Kerry Packer. Kerry Packer just says "Are you being deliberately this offensive, or is it just natural?" Frank Lowey won't answer your questions as the head of Westfield and will just dismiss them. A lot of chairmen don't like it but the great thing about it is that under the law they must give you a good opportunity to speak and ask questions. Compare that with journalists who ask questions, and they might say "no comment" or "off the record" or "this interview is over" - they can't do that in the legal context of an AGM.
Can you point to any tangible wins you have had?
Probably three big ones. I nominated for the AMP Board on a platform for voting out the chairman. Some of the directors for the GIO debacle; and five directors, including the chairman all quit a week later, after I nominated. I was only a small factor in that but an important one.
I'm campaigning against cash-for-comment as a journalist, and I nominated for the Optus Board on an anti-cash-for-comment platform and they cancelled their contract with Alan Jones two weeks later.
And I nominated against Steve Vizard on the Telstra Board, specifically because of all his conflicts of interest with his union deal for Virtual Communities and his interest in buying up the internet development rights for AFL clubs. And within two weeks of being nominated for their Board on an anti-Vizard platform, he'd resigned.
There is not a lot of fanfare about it, but it can have a big impact if you pick the most sensitive targets, and these guys don't want a public brawl over the skeletons that are rattling in their closet, so they bow out gracefully.
What is your view in general of the quality of corporate governance in Australia?
There are two issues. Corporate performance and corporate governance. Corporate governance is getting better, but corporate performance remains very poor. Australia has got a very poorly performing corporate sector. Companies that have been dogs for years should be throwing out their directors and putting in some new blood. They just don't do it. There is no culture of that. Companies like Pasminco, Pacific Dunlop, Goodman Fielder - which is the biggest Australian food company - they have been dogs for five years and nothing has changed at the top.
So corporate governance is getting better. Companies are more transparent, they are disclosing more. But you have got a few notable exceptions where they have very, very poor corporate governance practices, such as NewsCorp, Kerry Packers PBL, Westfield Holdings. A lot of the companies with big, powerful chairmen who own a large slab of the company - often their corporate governance is very poor. Big companies like Spotless, where the management still control the company when the independent directors should be in the majority.
Looking at the American presidentials this week, the guy that ends up being pivotal is Ralph Nader, who ran on the whole platform that both of the major parties were in the pockets of the corporates. Is there any difference between there and Australia?
No, I think it is absolutely spot on that both of the major parties suck up to the media moguls and they suck up to big business and do deals in exchange for corporate support and political donations. And I think there is a lot of scope for a Ralph Nader type figure to emerge in Australia to blow open the political duopoly.
As someone who comes out of the liberal side of politics, do you have any advice for the union movement at the moment, as we try to make more of this corporate campaigning model?
I think this is something that they should focus on very strongly. Union superfunds are becoming increasingly powerful with the great amount of money in there and they should see themselves as now having genuine financial clout. In the US you often see the staff owning large chunks of companies. One of the major airlines in the US - I think it might be American Airlines - is 55% owned by their staff. In Australia you don't get that that much. The largest is Lend Lease, which is 14% owned by its staff. But if the staff can build up a big enough shareholding, through their superfund or through their staff share schemes, then they can have a big say in what goes on in the company.
by Peter Ross
|
Over 100 acting graduates converged on Redfern for an education day hosted by the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance.
A full day of professional development, eye opening anecdotes and talks from prominent industry "movers and shakers" hoped to set the course for the students on their road to successful careers as members of the acting fraternity.
The final year students, from institutions including NIDA, Nepean, Charles Sturt University, University of Wollongong, The Actors Centre and the University of Southern Queensland, spent the day picking up professional and industrial tips from actor peers, agents and Alliance staff and members.
Guest speakers included Genevieve Picot of the National Performers Committee member who recently appearing in the STC production, "The Great Man".
"I considered myself a bright person when I started working as an actor", Genevieve told the group.
"I had no idea that their was a forty hour week, or an eight hour day and that I was entitled to overtime when I worked longer!"
She considered that her Equity membership help her to change her way of thinking.
Geoff Morrell (Grass Roots-ABC TV) and Kate Beahan (currently filming Love is a 4 letter word-ABC TV) offered insight into the difficulties and pitfalls facing actors just starting out.
Together with NSW Branch President Peter Carroll and Genevieve Picot, the group outlined the importance to an actor of maintaining the commitment to their craft, while not compromising their artistic integrity.
Industry speakers (Association Of Drama Agents), Faith Martin (Faith Martin Television and Film Casting) and Claire Woods (Just Super) rounded out the days' events before the group retreated to the MEAA courtyard in Redfern for evening drinks to complete proceedings.
by Andrew Casey
|
"We hope the cleaning contractors are prepared to negotiate seriously today," said Kurt Westby, president of SEIU Local 531 which represents the janitors.
"Every day without an agreement, janitors face a daunting task -- putting food on the table on poverty wages."
The janitors began striking October 2 to protest unfair labor practices.
The SEIU cleaners plan a new round of street protests if talks don't produce a contract that lifts the cleaners out of poverty, Kurt Westby said.
An earlier story about start of this US cleaners hunger strike appeared on this website in October. Click here to read
The striking is affecting commercial office buildings in five major cities and towns in Connecticut.
Janitors are seeking living wages, affordable health insurance, and more full-time work opportunities.
The strikers have won overwhelming public support for their campaign to escape poverty.
Four state legislators showed their support for janitors by conducting civil disobedience outside the Stamford Train Station. The legislators stopped traffic by sitting down in the streets.
Members of Connecticut's Fairfield County clergy staged a sit-in at GE Capital's offices in Stamford where janitors are on strike.
Janitors across the country are aiding the Connecticut strikers.
Janitors contributed nearly $A 1 million to the strike fund.
In addition janitors, in cities outside the strike affected areas, who work for the same cleaning contractors, have said they are prepared to walk off the job in support of the striking cleaners if an agreement isn't reached soon.
by Neale Towart
|
Whether it's at Flemington, Royal Randwick, Wangaratta or Oodnadatta, you will here it on 2KY. The station hasn't been around as long as the Melbourne Cup, but has a long tradition of association with the races and the workers. Gareth McCray has documented some of the highlights in Reflections of 2KY: 75 years of broadcasting.
The minutes of the Labor Council at its Executive Committee meeting of 17th February 1925 recorded the following:
R E. Voigt was present by invitation of the Council to place the matter of "Radio" fully before the Executive. He explained the approximate cost of the installation of a B Class Broadcasting Station would be �1,500 - 500 watt station. This station could broadcast to any part of Australia or New Zealand. It could be picked up by small crystal sets on a 12 mile radius. Crystal Sets could be made at a small cost approximately 4 or 5 shillings each".
The following resolution was soon carried unanimously:-
"That we recommend that the principle of installing a broadcasting set of the B Class be affirmed. Further that a Committee be appointed with power to go right ahead, addressing meetings on the matter".
Class B stations were stations financed by selling commercials. Class A ones were financed by license fees.
The three oldest B class stations still broadcasting are 2UE, 2UW and 2KY. Only 2KY retains its original owner.
Emil Robert Voigt was the prime mover behind Labor Council getting into broadcasting. He was clearly concerned that unions have their own media voice via the radio (and also union newspapers). He was also the instigator of the Labor Research and Information Bureau at Trades Hall as a centre for union information gathering to help unions remain on top of industry trends. Other great NSW labour movement names on the Labor Council Executive at the time were Jack Beasley and Jock Garden.
On the 7th of May 1925 the Labor Council applied for permission to build a "B Class" broadcasting station in Sydney with programme material that focused on "Matters of educational value, musical entertainment, news service, weather and market reports, public debates and other matters of general public interest".
The P.M.G. approved the License on the 20th of May 1925 for a fee of �5 per annum. The Labor Daily reported that the Station was one of the most powerful in the Southern Hemisphere. The call sign allotted by the P.M.G. was 2IC. This was changed briefly to 2LC, then 2TH and finally to 2KY, which was Voigt's preference.
They're Racing
From 1st October 1949 Night Totting commenced and 2KY covered that event and has covered every meeting since. Ken Howard was at the mike for that meeting.
In the mid 1960s, 2GB allowed 2KY to broadcast the Wednesday racing and as result 2GB's Cliff Cary was heard on 2KY. By 1968 you could hear racing out of 2GB on 2KY on Wednesday and on Friday Night from Harold Park and Saturday Night 2KY would broadcast the greyhounds...both of these with Ray Conroy.
From 1974 it was decided that 2KY would start doing its own Wednesday meetings instead of taking the feed from 2GB. By August of that year it was decided at 2KY that the station should do its own Saturday Racing Service during the daytime. The dilemma was how this would be achieved as the station did not have a network like 2GB. Technical staff managed to organise links with Channel 10 to overcome this problem.
The competition with 2GB was intense from then until 2GB decided to drop racing in 1981.
The federal government Narrowcasting decision of 1992 enabled 2KY under Barrie Unsworth to develop a strong network of Racing Narrowcasting Services across NSW. By the year 2000 this had given 2KY a network of 145 stations across NSW.
Workers Online continues the 2KY tradition, with Labor Council again being quick to exploit the opportunity offered by the new media to provide the labour movement with a new voice in their support, as well as a way to talk back to the powers that be. We don't have the horses, but sport is there, as well as news and ideas for labour. 2KY has moved onto the web too at http://www.2ky.com.au.
Digital radio is the next move with 2KY being the first Australian station to test Digital Audio Broadcasting. The popularity of home digital music equipment means that radio needs to make the move to survive. CD quality sound will come through your radio receiver, terrestrially or via satellite, on the same frequency, which will offer national coverage for the broadcaster.
|
In the year 2000, the information super-highway is a path well travelled. Most of us now consider the internet (particularly email and the world wide web) as a necessary, if not essential, business communication tool.
However with the advent of the internet, comes an immense potential for employers to become liable for employees' misuse and abuse of this communication medium. Conversely employees should understand and be wary of their exposure to potential risks arising from their use of their employer's internet facilities.
There is a great deal of debate occurring amongst commentators about the degree to which an employer can and should monitor and control the content of employees' internet and email communications.
Whilst some privacy groups have expressed concerns regarding the intrusion of employers into employees personal communications, there is some acknowledgment amongst them that a degree of monitoring and control is necessary to protect not only the interests of the company, but employees who may be subject to offensive email and other internet communications.
There appears to be no legislative prohibition on employers monitoring or controlling employee email or other internet communications. Current privacy legislation in Australia has limited impact on internet communications. The Commonwealth Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) is confined to regulating the tax file numbering system and the collection, use and access to personal credit information. The Queensland Invasion of Privacy Act 1971 (Qld) similarly does not extend to internet and email communications.
In essence this means there is no general right to privacy for employees in Queensland in relation to internet communications.
The Privacy Amendment (Private Sector) Bill 2000 which was introduced into the House of Representatives on 12 April 2000 to amend the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) does not appear to specifically prohibit monitoring of employees' internet communications. The Senate Legal and Constitutional Legislation Committee tabled its report regarding the Bill in the Senate on 10 October 2000. The Bill looks like it will become law by the end of the next sittings.
The Privacy Amendment (Private Sector) Bill 2000 will essentially create a nationwide scheme for the appropriate use of personal information in the private sector.
The Bill requires that organisations protect people from unauthorised access and disclosure of 'personal information' that they hold. It requires that organisations must not collect 'personal information' unless the information is necessary for one or more of its functions or activities. Organisations will also be required to make public their policy on privacy under the Bill. The Bill exempts 'employee records' from the legislation. The definition of an 'employee record' is broadly defined to include the types of information held on personnel files. The advisory report on the Bill tabled in the lower house by the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Issues on 26 June 2000 does not make any further recommendations about the issue.
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner has predicted that in relation to the private sector, the Bill may apply to staff emails that contain personal information other than 'employee records' in certain circumstances; and that the Bill may also apply to logs of web browsing activities . However, the Bill does not specifically prohibit monitoring of email and other internet communications by employers. Such practice would seem consistent with the intent of the Bill and proposed National Privacy Principles provided that employees are aware of the reasons for its collection and the consequences for the individual if it is collected.
More importantly, the Bill will not prohibit this type of activity if the employee consents to it. If employees are comprehensively informed of their employer's monitoring and control of email and internet content and the employee carries on using the employer's facilities, it could be argued that the employee has impliedly consented to the practice. An employee's written consent would remove doubt about this situation.
If the Bill becomes legislation, it remains to be seen what effect, if any, the legislation will have on this practice.
In terms of the ability for employers to actually monitor and control email and internet communications, technology is improving rapidly. There is currently screening software available that can filter both email and other internet communications. Many larger organisations already use 'net nannies' to reduce the risk of access to web sites with particular key words in them. Other companies conduct random audits of employees' emails for offending content.
There is possibly one piece of legislation in Australia that may be able to limit the monitoring or control of internet communications by employers, although the position under this legislation is less than clear. The legislation is the Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979. This legislation essentially prohibits the interception of a communication passing over a telecommunications system by listening to or recording (by any means), such a communication in its passage over that telecommunications system, without the knowledge of the person making the communication. Some commentators suggest that an employer's network server that keeps a cache copy of every email or internet connection made or received by an employee, may be an 'interception' of a communication for the purposes of that legislation.
Whilst the writer does not profess to have technical knowledge of the workings of the internet, it is possible that an employer's network server could arguably form part of a telecommunications system. Mail scanning applications that automatically examine phrases, words or viruses and quarantine them from the employee user, may arguably be in breach of the legislation as they 'listen to or record' another persons communication passing over a telecommunications system.
The Telecommunications (Interception) Act 1979 has not been tested in relation to this issue in Australia. However, there is a decision in the United States that suggests that senders of internet communications impliedly consent to the storage of their communication as it is transmitted over the internet through a network of servers to its ultimate destination. The decision suggests that in these circumstances, because the sender impliedly consents to this occurring, there is no unauthorised 'interception' It remains to be seen how the Australian courts will approach the issue.
by Strewth
|
We hear a lot today about the brave new world of globalisation and the information revolution sweeping away the old boys network and the clubby hierarchies of yesteryear. Well, I want to know who's doing the sweeping and who's being swept. Ask around the office space and tell me that the bright young things of the cyber age aren't the same old private school cabal who have always assumed the right to run this country. Maybe that's the way it has to be. What isn't so nice is the crowing on the graves of people who took their medicine. Ever heard someone derided by the smart set as rednecks, westies, shitkickers, bogans, dole bludgers, homeboys or white trash? Welcome to the new snobbery.
Snobbery is everywhere--it does not require a plummy voice or a pommy aristocracy. Just as it pays to be wary of a bloke who calls you "mate" beware when a country protests its egalitarianism too much. Snobbery is not about accents and money or Englishness or education (though these things still fuel a rancid form of snobbery in Australia) but stems from an unquestioned assumption of self-importance and superiority over other people.
Who are Australia's snobs? Forget John Howard's pretence to be the battler's friend. The Liberals are still the same party of small-minded suburban real estate agents, greedy city lawyers and in-bred born-to-rule ninnies we love to hate. Go to any branch meeting and they're chockers with snobs who want to sort everyone else out: unions, republicans, feminists, greenies, Aborigines, youth gangs, dole bludgers, those ethnics. But mainly they don't like the way you talk. Are you RC? Like the Nats, most ALP branch members are fair dinkum, but Labor has a fair share of snobs too--middle class lefties who tut tut like disapproving schoolmaams, and working class social climbers from the right who can't wait to get the house in the eastern suburbs and a trip to the Harvard School of Business. For some reason many media people are awful snobs too, especially those who circulate around the broadsheets, the ABC and Channel Nine.
Australia has always had class divisions camouflaged by an egalitarian ethos that is about as fair dinkum as a SOCOG ticket lottery. We make a big noise about being classless but inequalities in wealth are getting worse, not better. New technology, globalisation and free market economics conspire to make some people very rich and happy, while consigning others to the scrap heap. The gulf in money is exacerbated by widening inequalities in the things that all citizens are supposed to share--education, employment, health services, cultural amenities, public transport, scenery, trees, parks. It's no secret that in Sydney the western suburbs not only have the lowest incomes and highest unemployment, but also the lowest school retention and uni entrance rates, the greatest number of health problems and the highest levels of imprisonment.
Snobbery gets in the way of a fair dealing out of the cards. It's the unspoken passport that shoehorns a kid from an elite private school into a well-paid job. Snobbery ensures one old boy gives another old boy the lucrative contract he craves. Snobbery ensures the same old stagers get to the front of the trough when the Australia Council hands out arts grants. Thanks to snobbery we have to put up with David Caeser whining about being the country's only working class filmmaker.
The Snob Streak
Since the bush balladeers of the 1880s, the national culture has celebrated the underdog--the Eureka gold miners, sheep stealing swaggies, renegade bushrangers, striking shearers, uncouth Irish larrikins, scallywag street urchins like Ginger Meggs, unruly diggers, poor boys made good like Chif, Nifty and Hoges--an unbroken line of sentimental blokes from Lawson to Kerrigan. We like the larrikin who upsets upper class English manners, but perhaps the ocker protests too much.
From the earliest days of the colony at Sydney, trumped up free immigrants took the name Exclusives and raised themselves above the scorned ex-convicts. Two-bit speculators and ne'er-do-well second sons of the British gentry in cahoots with the corrupt screws of the Rum Corps carved up the harbour foreshore, pinched the good land from the aborigines and dreamed of presiding over an antipodean plantation system as some sort of Bunyip Aristocracy. Convicts drawn from Britain's unwanted underclass got stuck with the shit work, the dodgy housing and no views.
Once freed, ex-cons were expected to check in their ticket of leave at the trademan's entrance and work for their betters. Just like the cranky mother country, Australia was a land divided--by class, race and religion. Throughout the last century the Protestant ascendancy ran the colonies as landholders, merchants, professionals, administrators, legislators, magistrates and missionaries.
Putting the natives to one side (which they did, in reserves) it was the Irish who were to be ascended over, despised for their religion, rebelliousness, bad habits, and a poverty not entirely of their own making. This is an animosity that shapes Australian snobbery. In the 1930s my Protestant mother was not allowed into the home of her Catholic grandmother. When I was a kid in the 1960s poor Protestants and Catholics still brawled after school, ignorantly fighting a tribal war run by generals far away in time. The anti-Irish cast of the establishment explains the mad, irrational hate which the Liberals have for Keating--the uncouth, swaggering Irish spiv from their worst ancestral nightmares. Today this antipathy is simmering just below the surface in the republican debate, as the land of hope and glory set fight one last battle against treason.
The ruling class couldn't get away with it forever, and by the time of the great strikes and political ferment of the 1890s a democratic counter-mythology idolising the ordinary bush worker was loose in the land. Australian egalitarianism always left more people out than it embraced, but in the big scheme of things it gave the toffs the fright of their lives and concessions were made. By the 1950s Australia was supposed to be a classless society, but striking miners, immigrant factory fodder and Aborigines didn't quite see it that way. To this day the egalitarian ethos is used by politicians, business bhagwans and commentators to hoodwink us into thinking the shit sandwich tastes yummy. Don't believe them.
Snobbery Today
We still have with us the old Rule Britannia snobs of yesteryear like Bronwyn Bishop and Janette Howard, but it's the shiny new millennial snobs that are our real problem--the consultants, media gurus, celebrities, freelancers and sundry 'professionals' that we read about in the colour supplements. They're the upper middle class, tertiary-educated elites accustomed to seeing their world view reflected in the Sydney Morning Herald, who do very nicely out of the new economy because they do well out of every economy. Hugh Mackay might call this new elite "symbolic analysts" but, despite affecting a fashionable left-of-centre banter, these time-poor, home-renovating cosmopolitan harbour huggers enjoy a continuity with the ancestral Australian snobs. They are for the most part Anglo Saxon, private school old boys and girls hogging whatever gigs offer the most money and status. Once it was sheep, colonial administration, the East India company and land speculation; now it's media, government consultancies, Microsoft and...well, land speculation. Social balls and charity have morphed into PR events and openings. New frocks and new drugs but the same budgets, same VIP lists, same mindless chatter, same servants on shit wages, same exclusion. Upper middle class Australia is no longer the exclusive property of the Protestant ascendancy, but the newcomers to money and status have learned the old putdowns. The habits of the Irish push remain beyond the pale--it's just that it's the Bankstown Lebs and the Cabramatta Vietnamese who now carry the shillelagh.
Social Climbers
Snobs don't just look down on others, they also look up to their betters. Passionate believers in hierarchy, a snob believes some people are superior to themselves, but hopes desperately that a little bit of the superiority will rub off. Like Basil Fawlty, they run around noisily policing hierarchies to impress those upstairs. Australia is full of these insecure little guys. Look at John Howard's craven attitude to the British monarchy or the lackeys who write the social pages. Watch Michael Knight roll out the red carpet when Juan Antonio comes to town. Check out the door bitches at a trendy nightclub/art opening/fashion show. Hang out on the film set of an AFTRS production and watch the wankers bask in the director's reflected light. Get your hair cut in Darlinghurst. Talk to a researcher at Channel Nine. The old English aristocracy were right. The worst snobs are the social climbers.
Art Snobs
An obsession with hierarchies of taste marks out as snobs the high modernist culture priests like Robert Hughes, Colin Lancely and Robert Dessaix who condemn popular taste and "mass culture" while they repeat fire their rusty cannons. I'm talking about guys like Philip Adams who work for News Corp and reckon we are all brainwashed by American TV while going into a lather over the latest art flick or British costume drama. What about the network programmer at ABC TV, Hugh McGowan--now there's a snob who stood up for "God Save the Queen" when he was in britches. And why is it that the commissars down at the AFC and the NSW Film and TV Office fund obscure films for the Cannes circuit that Australians don't want to see? You see, like a good old Tory with a thoroughbred, the culture snobs can suss out true quality. The high priests repeat the sermon that we are indeed philistines in order to keep art in its heaven and us in our place.
City vs The Bush
Snobbery can be ugliest in a small town, where local matrons freeze out the unmarried mother, while the mortgage-strapped trades belt slag off the unemployed "housos" down the hill. The province discriminates with obvious, clumsy and occasionally brutal disdain. Look at Pauline Hanson's cheer squad or the pecking order in a country RSL. Big cities like Sydney and Melbourne like to boast that they are "cosmopolitan" and "tolerant", but in my opinion the small "l" liberal intelligentsia of the metropolis can put most rednecks to shame. More often city snobs are just better at keeping a safe distance from those they don't like, or are more clever when they make their assumed inferiors feel like a bag of shit.
White Mans Burdon
For many white inner-city sophisticates, Aborigines are best kept in the Dreamtime and "multiculturalism" ends at the restaurant. Aborigines are more likely to hang out with white knockabouts than play the exotic at an inner-city dinner party--I wonder why? Multiculturalism is all about "us" being enriched. Migrants are praised for improving "our" food but snobs run a mile from a real Bankstown Leb acting the modern Larrikin. Remember how Australians of Arabic ancestry suddenly lost their nationality and became "Lebanese" after shots were fired at a police station. That was our urbane Labor Premier reminding us that Anglo superiority can be relied on in a fix to make others feel shit. The Aussie fair go has become the multicultural fair--the wogs are tolerated as long as they dance in their national costumes and don't hang out on our streets.
Neck and Neck
Working class and rural whites are stereotyped and mocked by inner-city wits for their westie accents, conservative ideas, intolerance, crude manners, addictions, cars, garages, bad taste ornaments, bad hair, cheap tracksuits, big dogs, TV dinners, processed cheese, commercial TV, instant coffee, sexism and homophobia. This is a classic case of blaming the victim. In a bizarre replay of the dispossession of peasants in the industrial revolution, the information revolution has dealt cruelly with the Australian working class in city and country, not just eliminating their jobs but tearing the guts out of their communities and traditions. Then on top of all this they have to cop being villified as rednecks or buffoons by clever urban sophisticates. After upper middle class right wing bastards have done their darnedest to rob blue collar people of a decent income, a job, a train station, a hospital bed and unemployment benefits, along comes a bunch of lefty middle class whingers to make them feel shit about their way of life. No wonder they listen to a ratbag like Pauline Hanson and kicked Jeff Kennett and the republic to kingdom come.
by Chris Christodoulou
|
Powerful, humorous, teary, these are all the feelings and images that you take away after watching this great film.
In the same mould as "Brassed Off" this film exposes the devastation inflicted upon the lives of the mining communities under "Thatcherism" in a very light-hearted and liberal way. It focuses directly on 14 year old Billy Elliot a boy who has lost his mother and who just wants to be a dancer.
Whilst the plot centres around Billy's attempts to hide his ambitions from his family, the story line tackles the issue of how a very macho miner (father) deals with the reality of the situation that his son's choice to be a professional dancer is a better option than following in his father's footsteps to be a mineworker or boxer.
Billy's father and family need to also deal with the issue of whether Billy is embarking upon a career choice or is simply showing some "gay" tendencies. This is handled very tastefully by introducing the audience to Billy's best friend who happens to be a cross dresser and gay.
The film deals with the "gay" issue in a tad unrealistic way but nonetheless sends a very clear message to the audience that its not one's sexuality or sexual bias that counts when making decisions on life chances. Every scene in the movie has its own touch of humour, sadness and powerful imagery.
Whether it be Billy's first attempts to join the ballet class or Billy's fathers unconscionable act of breaking the union picket line, or the family's agonising two minute wait for Billy to tell them whether he has been accepted into the London Dance Academy it all just gels together into one of the great movies of the year.
As movies go this is a 9 out of 10.
Kim Beazley |
It is great to be here with you tonight.
I want to report to you from Canberra something that you will all be pleased and grateful to hear.
And that is this proposition: the union movement has received its last lecture on rorting from the Hon. Peter Reith, MP !
Thanks to the Telecard affair, we have had revealed to us exactly how tired, how arrogant and how out of touch are the ministers now governing this country.
I know you will all be pleased to hear that we have been having a bit of fun with Peter Reith in Parliament over recent weeks.
We've been reminding him of all the calumnies and vituperations and bombast he has heaped upon the trade unionists of this country in recent years.
Remember his Rort of the Day page on his ministerial website?
There he was accusing members of the Maritime Union of Australia of rorting at the very time he had handed over his Telecard to his son for his personal use.
In Parliament this week we asked him a question. It was in his capacity as Minister responsible for Workplace Relations, on the issue of workplace productivity - that is his own workplace productivity!
He used to be forever getting up and getting himself asked questions by his own side as an excuse to wallop the union movement for dropping back on productivity levels.
This was our question to him this week: "Can you confirm that in the 50 sitting days this year until 9 October you had answered 60 Dorothy Dixers in question time, a productivity rate of 1.2 per day
"Can you confirm that since the 9 October your productivity rate has fallen to just 0.44 per day?
"And this month, with no questions in four days, your productivity rate is zero - a rate even beaten by Wilson Tuckey.
"Minister can you think of anything that might have caused this dramatic fall off in your productivity?
"If these were crane rate on Australia's wharves, wouldn't you be calling in the attack dogs and men with balaclavas?"
Well, ladies and gentlemen, because of the Telecard affair the Reith Rottweiler has become a chihuahua.
And even the chihuahua has been de-barked.
Tonight I want to have a brief word to you about the most important issues facing Australians today -- how the Australian Labor Party can restore fairness to health, education and living standards in this country.
And then I want to go into some detail with you about the need to be eternally vigilant to the Howard Government's continuous attacks on the rights of workers and trade union members.
Over the past couple of years, growing numbers of people have said to me: If the economy is so good, as the Howard Government keeps telling us, how come my family cannot seem to get a decent share?
How does it come about that our living standards are falling, not rising? How come we are finding it harder to make ends meet?
And the answer is in part because this Government has been happy to preside over the creation of two Australias - made up of the small group doing very well indeed, and then the rest.
Whether it is the Howard Government's obsession with building up the richest private schools, or whether it's their determination to run down our great public hospitals, this is a Government acting on behalf of the few, not the many.
The people's wants from government are pretty straightforward in this country. They boil down to three basics:
The issue of education encapsulates the whole sad and sorry approach of the Howard government.
The front page of the Sydney Morning Herald said it all this week.
It's headline proclaimed: "Cabinet is Almost Entirely a Private School Boys' Club."
It turns out that more than three quarters of the Federal Cabinet attended exclusive private schools.
Only three Cabinet members attended a government high school. Of the remaining 14 cabinet ministers 12 attended private schools such as Scotch College, Carey Grammar and Geelong Grammar in Victoria, and the King's School and Barker College in NSW.
Two Cabinet members went to Catholic schools, John Fahey to Chevalier and Richard Alston to Melbourne's Xavier College.
Contrast this with the Australian Labor Party front bench that truly reflects the experience of the broader Australian population.
The 29-member Labor front bench has 18 members educated in the public schools, and 9 who went to Catholic schools, and only two who went to other private schools.
This is truly a representative front bench, unlike our opponents. Some 70 percent of Australian schoolchildren go to public schools, about 22 percent go to Catholic schools and the small proportion left over go to the sorts of expensive private schools so familiar to Howard Government ministers.
Is it any wonder that the Howard government has so completely lost touch with people around the country.
They are trying to defend a situation in which 61 of our top private schools will share $56 million in taxpayers' funds, while our public schools, which educate most of the nation's children, are allowed to run down.
As I said the other day, it is about time John Howard wound down the window of the Prime Ministerial limousine and started listening to the concerns of Australian people.
The Reith affair is just the latest example.
Australians know that if it was some ordinary taxpayer that had been overpaid by the Commonwealth, or who had underestimated his or her income, even if it was by a few dollars, they would have people like Mr Reith breaking down the doors to get the money back.
We in the Labor Party can also take comfort from the fact that the Government's chief ideological spear-carrier is a much-diminished warrior.
As I said the other day, I think we can say Peter Reith's leadership ambitions are now permanently on hold.
And John Howard cannot escape unscarred by this affair. He kept quiet on this for months, and it took a leak to a newspaper to flush him out.
Well, John Howard prides himself on being old fashioned - everybody has to be proud of something. And there's an old fashioned view that our national Parliament is entitled to be told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. That's one old-fashioned value John Howard is clearly prepared to let slide to protect his political skin.
There is one rule for the Howard Government and another for the ordinary taxpayers, and the ordinary families of Australia.
The Reith affair is just another sign of a government that has lost its way. Whether it is the GST impost on small business, or higher petrol prices, or burgeoning interest rates, or the decline in regional services, or our health and education, the Howard Government has given up even the pretence of governing for the battlers.
Under the Howard Government the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, and the middle is just getting more and more squeezed
What this country urgently needs is a new economic reform agenda that will increase living standards and create jobs over the coming decades.
But is that what we get from John Howard and Peter Reith?
Of course not. All we have ever had from them is union baiting, and confrontation.
John Howard may call him a star, but there's no denying that Peter Reith has had a fairly average run since he managed to get his 1996 industrial relations legislation through the Parliament.
People started seeing through Peter Reith even before this Telecard Ding-a-ling affair.
Peter Reith has not been able to persuade the Senate to stomach his 2nd Wave legislation.
And he has not been able to get Senate support to make his own unfair dismissal laws even more worker-unfriendly, or his plans to prevent pattern bargaining by unions (though not, of course, by employers).
The Federal Court has not agreed with him that employers have the unfettered right to restructure and reform their companies so that they can slash their employees' pay and conditions -- the plan pioneered by Patrick's, the stevedoring firm at the heart of the waterfront dispute.
The Federal Court's refusal to play Reith's game has led him to cast around for more favourable alternatives. In his 2nd wave, for example, he proposed that State Supreme Courts should have jurisdiction in industrial matters. When the Government set up a Federal Magistrates' Court to help cut the backlog of cases in the Family Court, he tried to hijack it -- and no doubt stack it --so that it could also deal with industrial relations.
We can enjoy his frustration at all this failure, not only because it has been caused by workers and their unions fighting for workplace justice.
While we may believe it is justice at work when we see the death throes of Peter Reith's leadership ambitions, we need to be watchful of his potential to continue to do damage to workers and their unions while they remain in the job. Let me give you two reasons.
We have a year -- maybe a little longer -- before the next election: a year, that is, before there's a chance to get rid of the most biased industrial legislation we've seen in Australia for very many years: legislation that is, clearly and unashamedly, aimed at reducing the cost of labour.
You here in the CFMEU know better than most the effects on working people's interests of Reith's 1996 workplace relations legislation.
You have felt its effects:
You in the CFMEU appreciate better than most that union resources have had to be concentrated in the courts to defend your rights and interests and those of your members.
My point is that Reith probably has another year to pursue his agenda. The man has been nursing his agenda for years. Don't think for a minute that a spot of bother over his Telecard will keep him quiet for long.
While his second wave, his unfair dismissal proposals and his pattern bargaining legislation have all hit the wall, they are still on the Senate agenda. And, as you know, in an attempt to break through the Senate impasse, Peter Reith has been putting up separate bits of his 2nd wave:
The objective is absolutely clear: to carry on stacking the workplace odds against workers' interests.
True, unions have been quite successful in devising ways to protect their members from Peter Reith's attacks, even using his own legislation against him. But he has more plans for the unions too.
About a year ago, he put out a discussion paper on union activities. It was entitled Accountability and Democratic Control of Registered Industrial Organisations. A nice Orwellian name for what is basically a plan for making it even harder for unions to go about their business, imposing on them standards of governance and administration which ordinary corporations would find onerous.
Our understanding is that he will come into Parliament before the end of the year with legislation giving effect to these proposals.
In other words, unions and their members need to continue to be wary and vigilant. Peter Reith may have been batting close to zero for some time but his agenda lives on, he'll be looking for payback after his Telecard experience.
He has behind him, driving him on, a Prime Minister who has been an enemy of unions all his public life. We can expect that industrial relations will continue to be a battlefield, no matter how much social and economic damage ensues.
We have been working closely on the system that an incoming Labor Government will put in place if elected to office at next year's election.
We have to get away from the present industrial relations scene which has been described by a judge of the Victorian Supreme Court as "ritualised mayhem in which only the innocent are slaughtered".
The core of Labor's industrial relations legislation will be restoration of the powers of the Industrial Relations Commission, so that it can bring back fairness in the workplace, act in the public interest, and keep the industrial peace.
It is essential, especially as arbitration gives way to bargaining, that the law require all parties to negotiate in good faith. Our legislation will support the primacy of -- and we will give precedence to -- collective forms of bargaining.
But we will insist on good faith bargaining, whatever bargaining options are preferred.
Our legislation will recognise that the right of employees to act, organise and protect themselves collectively is a fundamental element of justice in the workplace.
And I am here to give you a firm pledge tonight: we will abolish Peter Reith's Australian Workplace Agreements.
They are his invention and, like all his other workplace inventions, they have a partisan purpose. The AWA is a form of agreement between employers and individual workers which is secret and unreviewable and which has been shown in very many cases to be unfair and less favourable than collective agreements.
It is a form of agreement that applies to less than 2% of the workforce, yet needs a $45 million bureaucracy to run it. The Reith AWA will go under Labor, and the bureaucracy will go with it.
The 2nd wave inquiry heard wherever it went how Peter Reith's onslaught on the award system was really just another way to devalue and reduce working conditions. Labor's legislation will restore the central role that awards and agreements play not only in preventing and settling disputes but also in encouraging work to be healthy, safe, non-discriminatory, family-friendly and fair.
The stakes are too great for the ideological games played by Peter Reith and his leader. Our workforce is now more atomised and casualised than at any time in our history. We have the second highest level of casual employment in the developed world. We are working longer hours than we were a generation ago.
Work processes and technology are changing at an enormous pace. The level of anxiety and insecurity among Australian workers is around the highest it has ever been in peacetime. We have a disorganised and under-funded training system.
When we consider questions like these, we realise just how narrow-minded the industrial world view is of the Howard Government and its Minister responsible for industrial relations. As on so many other issues, such as tax and privatisation, Peter Reith and John Howard are mired in the industrial relations debate of past times.
The debate used to be: confrontation versus cooperation; or arbitration versus bargaining; or collective versus individual. The new industrial relations debate has advanced beyond this. In a Knowledge Nation the central focus of industrial relations must be to create cooperative, consensual workplaces with a better-educated, better trained workforce.
This is the way the Knowledge Nation generates greater productivity.
So not only is it good social policy to have a fairer, more cooperative workplace, there can be no doubt it is good economic policy as well.
But this Government just doesn't get it. And in truth, it is not just Peter Reith's fault. It's John Howard who is really to blame. He just doesn't get cooperative industrial relations.
It is all part of a philosophy of a narrowly-focused government that cares about the few, not the many.
They promised to govern for all of us, but instead their slogan has become a pledge to govern "for all of us at the top end of town."
There is time to turn back this tide before our commitment as a nation to egalitarianism and fairness is lost for ever.
That is what Labor pledges.
And we will do it with your help.
Thank you.
This was an address given to CFMEU Mining and Energy division National Convention dinner, Coffs Harbour, NSW, 9 November 2000
|
In sport as in all things money corrupts and with the golden glow of the Olympics now receding ugly realities have resurfaced to remind us of the destructive power of profit in the realm of what should be fun, escapism and trivia.
This week Richard Virenque, the revered French cyclist, finally admitted to a French tribunal that professional cycling is fuelled by EPO and anabolic steroids. For anyone who has witnessed the Tour de France this isn't much of a surprise.
Expecting a human being to climb up and down the Alps, the Pyrenees and the Massif Centrale every day for three weeks with the only break in the routine being the gruelling time trials without the aid of drugs is a big ask.
It's now evident that what was once one of the most fascinating sports event on the calendar - a true war of attrition of the human body - is now just a laboratory for the pharmaceutical companies in the same way Grand Prix racing is the testing ground for the car manufacturers.
Rugby League continues to be a textbook lesson in how to destroy a sport. The South Sydney debacle speaks for itself and the lame joke called the Rugby League World Cup is a big pin poised over the bubble of new media hype. If Russia versus Lebanon in Rugby League is to be the content and the choice that will occupy the dial in the Internet age then bring back the wireless.
And then there is cricket. The cricket world bears a striking resemblance to the evolving Russian state. Into the void created with the fall of the ancien regime flows the mafia. Louis XVI would have been more in touch with the feelings of the Paris mob than cricket's administrators are with the state of their own game.
How is it that the captains of seven out of the nine test playing countries either knowingly or unknowingly were in the tentacles of India's bookies without the establishment knowing or doing anything about it? The full extent of cricket's catastrophe before the rupee is yet to be fully grasped. If it was so easy to ensnare the captains, what about the groundsmen, the umpires and all the others who can easily swing the results of a cricket match?
Call me a dreamer or a rationaliser but one of the things I've always loved about sport - especially team sport - is its democratic nature and sense of collectivism.
In our (flawed) democracy the powerless only get one chance every several years to participate and make a difference with a vote. As a sports fan you get to participate week in and week out among a collective even if its basis is purely trivial.
Sport is just the latest terrain for the plutocracy to engorge themselves and impose their will. As South Sydney fans have demonstrated, in sport as in everything else, you always have to defend yourself against the destructive power of the moneymen.
Casuals Aren't Short Term if Previously Full-time/contract
The AIRC has ruled that, under the Workplace Relations Act regulation 30B(3)(a), which appears to exclude casual employees from unfair dismissal laws, workers who have been on a series of contracts or have previously been full time employees are able to access the regulation.
In the ADI Ltd case, the full bench upheld an appeal by an employee who had been employed on a succession of fixed term contracts more just more than a year before continuing as a casual for nine months. A single commissioner had initially ruled that only the nine months was relevant to the case.
In the Brown Gouge Rosebud case, Cmr Holmes dismissed an employer"s objection to allowing an unfair dismissal claim, and said that the regulation did not limit the nature of employment to casual work but rather referred to "engagement by a particular employer for periods of employment."
The Full Bench agreed with Holmes in the appeal over the ADI case, finding that it was not only the period employees worked as casual that should be counted in determining whether they were "short term."
http://www.workplaceexpress.com.au
Ethics in the Workplace
It is possible to be unethical, but still operate within the limits of the law. However, breaking the law often starts with unethical behaviour that has gone unnoticed. A large amount of attention has been paid to promoting workplace ethics over the past two decades. It has become standard for companies to provide ethics training and have policies and procedures in place to deal with unethical behaviour. Therefore you might expect ethical behaviour to be the 'norm' in organisations. Surveys seem to indicate this is not the case.
(New Workplace; vol. 6, no. 3, 2000; http://www.dir.nsw.gov.au)
The Experience of AWAs: case study evidence
Case studies conducted last year by the Office of the Employment Advocate (OEA) highlighted key issues around the uptake of AWAs, the organisations that introduce them, the types of worker covered and the negotiation process.
Reasons AWAs were introduced into workplaces varied widely. Mainly to achieve changes in work organisation not perceived to be possible under existing arrangements.
The OEA studies overall showed that the AWAs had provided a mechanism for management to alter working hours and remuneration to suit management.
The data from the OEA also showed that AWAs were increasingly being used to cover not only professional employees but now skilled workers. The coverage varied greatly between workplaces, with some companies restricting AWAs to just a few managerial employees, while others trying to extend them to the entire workforce.
The negotiation process is a crucial aspect and the studies show clearly that the introduction of AWAs rarely involve substantial employee input. This lack shows up clearly in ADAM data on the content of AWAs, that reveals less than 20% of AWAs had provisions relating to consultation, compared to more than 40% of non-union agreements and more than 60% of union agreements.
(IR Intelligence Report; issue 7, 2000)
Management Risk Associated with Shiftwork & Working Time Arrangements
The 'Safety Performance related to shiftwork in the Qld mining industry' report (published by the Qld Mining Council) highlighted a number of issues associated with the appropriate management of risks around shiftwork and working time arrangements.
The report seems to conclude that there is no evidence for an increase in risks associated with the introduction of 12 hour shifts. Also that no regulation is required and that the industry can risk manage any hazards at a workplace level. Part of the reason for this is the fear by employer groups about any codes of practice or guidelines that may be too prescriptive and interfere with their desire to implement maximum flexibility regimes in their operations.
The major concerns with this risk management approach are:
Industrial relations obstacles are also a problem with a difficulty of controlling the number of overtime hours (many sites report average hours in excess of 52 per week). Risk management will struggle to adequately control risks associated with long and intensive work schedules.
(IR Intelligence Report; issue 7, 2000)
Banking on a Better Deal for Staff - AWAs in the spotlight in the finance sector
Jonathan Seifman and Peter Punch
The Federal Court injunction restraining the Commonwealth Bank from offering AWAs to all staff serves as a lesson for large employers.
Justice Finkelstein found there was a sufficiently arguable case that the bank sought to coerce the union to enter new enterprise agreements (a potential breach of s298M and s170NC(1) of the Workplace Relations Act).
Finkelstein also concluded that the FSU had an arguable claim that employees had been misled and that "if it is not intentional in the sense of being deliberate, it at least strikes me as reckless."
It seems unlikely that the federal government had anticipated that the Federal Court would be the battleground on which the workplace relations legislation it has introduced would be fought.
(Australian Industrial Law Update; newsletter 10, October 2000)
Rate of Remuneration
The Full Bench of the AIRC endorsed the approach in Bell v McArthur River Mining Pty Ltd as to the meaning of the "rate of remuneration applicable to the employee immediately before the termination":
"the rate of remuneration applicable to the employee is an assessed annual rate of the cash payments made or liable to be made by the employer on behalf of the employee, or benefits in kind for the private use of the employee, exclusive of payment made as reimbursement, and identifiable as the reward or recompense for the work or service in the period of employment immediately prior to the termination of employment".
The council in this case claimed the remuneration was in excess of Workplace Relations Act regulations ($69,200 at the time).
Appeal by Watiyawanu Community Government Council against decision and order of Eames C on 3/12/99) AIRC, (S7110) 30/6/00; (2000) 48 AILR 4-331
(Australian Industrial Law Update; newsletter 10, October 2000)
Transmission of Award Obligations
The SDA applied for an award to be made to rope Newslink Pty Ltd into the Airport Retail Concessions Award 1990. It was agreed that Newslink was a successor or transmittee of the airport retail concessions business of Ansett. The issue was what award obligation was transmitted to Newslink as an employer. The Full Bench was satisfied that the conditions of the 1990 award should be observed by the new employer and this obligation was attached to Newslink upon its acquisition of the business from Ansett.
The SDA application for a new award was referred to Redmond C.
Application by the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association to vary the Airport Retail Concessions Award 1990, AIRC (S7888) 10/7/00; (2000) 48 AILR 4-328
(Australian Industrial Law Update; newsletter 10, October 2000)
Long Live the Rich
In France, in the year 2000, there are still blatant inequalities between people as regards health. Take for example, a 35-year old industrial worker, in the prime of life. What do we find? That his life expectancy is 6.5 years shorter than that of a manager, a doctor, or a notary of the same age. Things will not get better with old age, of course, but what is even more worrying is that inequality starts in the cradle. Premature births and low birth weight - which often lead to the development of serious diseases - are 1.5 to 2 times more frequent among the children of industrial workers and employees with low incomes.
(Trade Union World; no. 10, October 2000)
ULIN - Union Library and Information Network Welcomes New Members
Sydney based trade union librarians meet regularly to share ideas and for mutual support. The group includes librarians from the Public Service Association of NSW, Police Association of NSW, NSW Teachers Federation, CFMEU National Office, ACIRRT, AMWU, Labor Council of NSW, NSW Nurses Association.
Our current projects include contributing to the GLASS union list, which facilitates free inter-library loans within the group.
ULIN has a listserv hosted by the Australian Library and Information Association (ALIA). It's great being able to post tricky requests for information to the listserv or collective brains trust. Libraries were recently offered free archival storage boxes from one of our members, via the listserv. Thanks AMWU.
A forthcoming issue of ALIA's Incite will include a feature on trade union libraries.
Most importantly, the Christmas Party is just around the corner, so don't delay if you would like to join our group of librarians and information workers from trade unions. Contact:
Mary Schmidt
NSW Teachers Federation
Phone: 9217 2111
E-mail: [email protected]
It now appears likely that Ralph Nader's fantasy tilt at the Presidency has cost Al Gore the job. In an election where every vote counted, Nader managed to pinch enough votes from the Democrats to elect Forrest Gump II as commander of the Free World. In the key states of Florida, Oregan and Philidelphia, it was the Nader vote - inevitably skimming the Left of Gore's Democrat camp that stood between the two candidates.
The Nader campaign, that was to have been built around integrity, degenerated into a slanging match against Al Gore as it became obvious that Nader was going to get nowhere near the five per cent he needed to secure funding for future elections. In the final days, Nader was reduced to campaigning in Gore strongholds, attacking the Vice Presdient and ignoring the Gump.
The key to Nader's candidacy was that the Republicans and Democrats had become the one party, the presidential candidates offering identical policies: but as the New York Times pointed out in an editorial during the campaign this was intellectually dishonest. On key issues such as environment, labour laws, reproductive rights and international policy Gore's policy settings were substantially different from Bush's.
But in an era of sound-byte Democracy, the man who could say 'a pox on both your houses' was always going to get a following of sorts. The issues he raised about the corporate control over the major political parties were valid, but the outcome of his actions has been to play into Corporate America's hands by tilting a bewildered electorate into the grasps of the free-wheeling Texan.
The tragedy for Nader, is that he has ended up a caricature of the courageous consumer advocate who had gained international respect. As his campaign degenerated into an exercise in Gore-baiting, Nader exposed himself as a dangerous maverick with an ego out of control. His comments after the full impact of his contribution to Bush's likely victory became apparent says it all: "Al Gore cost me the presidency".
For Ralph Nader, it all ended up being about Ralph Nader.
© 1999-2000 Labor Council of NSW LaborNET is a resource for the labour movement provided by the Labor Council of NSW URL: http://workers.labor.net.au/77/print_index.htmlLast Modified: 15 Nov 2005 [ Privacy Statement | Disclaimer | Credits ] LaborNET is proudly created, designed and programmed by Social Change Online for the Labor Council of NSW |