New Anti-union assault

The following article was published in "The Guardian", newspaper
of the Communist Party of Australia in its issue of Wednesday,
October 20th, 1999. Contact address: 65 Campbell Street, Surry Hills.
Sydney. 2010 Australia. Phone: (612) 9212 6855 Fax: (612) 9281 5795.
CPA Central Committee: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"The Guardian": <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Webpage: http://www.cpa.org.au>
Subscription rates on request.
******************************

        PLEASE NOTE OUR CHANGED EMAIL AND WEBPAGE ADDRESSES
      AND MAKE THE NECESSARY ALTERATIONS TO YOUR ADDRESS BOOK

CPA CENTRAL COMMITTEE:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The Guardian": [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webpage: http://www.cpa.org.au

******************************

By Anna Pha
Without waiting for his second wave anti-union laws to be passed,
Workplace Relations Minister Peter Reith has released details of
his third round of union-bashing legislation. He is proposing
measures to permit employer-sponsored unions to squeeze out
genuine unions, for individual union members to be able to apply
for the disamalgamation of unions, and for unfinancial members to
be able to vote in the ballot.

The title of the discussion paper, "Accountability and democratic
control of registered industrial organisations", is as big a lie
as the "More Jobs, Better Pay" Bill - the second wave - that is
currently before the Senate.

The careful manipulation of language in the Bill is such that the
words "trade unions" do not even appear in the title of Reith's
discussion paper.

In fact, inverted meaning - where the intent and practical
outcome of the laws are the opposite of the words and phrases
used to describe them - runs throughout all of the government's
industrial relations material.

This is a reflection of the insidious, demagogic and anti-
democratic nature of the Howard Government itself.

The paper has four main thrusts:

1. to facilitate the fragmentation of unions and deunionisation
of workplaces, with the replacement of genuine, independent
unions by company unions - what Reith calls "freedom of
association";

2. to bog unions and officials down in paper work and accountancy
procedures - in the name of "increased accountability";

3. removing control of the union from elected union officials and
members - what Reith calls increasing "the level of democratic
control" and "autonomy";

4. extension of penal provisions for non-compliance - called
"protecting the integrity of the workplace relations system".

Company unions

In the 1996 Workplace Relations Act the Government reduced the
minimum membership requirement for a registered trade union from
100 to 50. Now Reith is proposing a further reduction to a
minimum of 20 members for "enterprise associations".

The definition of "enterprise association" is being broadened to
include workers in different locations employed by the same
employer.

When Reith uses the term "freedom of association", he means
freedom from association.

While life will be made tougher for genuine trade unions, the
registration (and book keeping) will be simplified for small
company-compliant unions.

At present one of the criteria for registration is that the
proposed organisation is supported by the workers eligible to be
members. This would be waived. The organisation only has to be
"viable".

"Newly registered enterprise unions may face difficulties in
representing members where there is an order in place ... to give
one or more organisations coverage to the exclusion of all
others", says Reith.

But this can be overcome, he argues, by ensuring that "orders for
exclusive coverage do not exclude enterprise unions registered
after a coverage order is made from representing employees".

That is, employers would be able to set up company unions,
regardless of exclusive coverage by genuine trade unions.

Any action on the part of the union or its members to try to
hinder the creation of company unions could result in
deregistration of the union and civil court penalties for those
involved.

At the same time as encouraging the proliferation of company
unions, Reith would like to undo union amalgamations.

He has already extended the time limit for applications to be
made for disamalgamations and is now proposing that "non-
financial members" be able to initiate the process and vote.

Unfinancial (lapsed) members should be kept on the rolls for two
years, then contacted and given up to three months to rejoin,
says Reith. They should be able to "rejoin", without paying a
joining fee or loss of continuity of membership!

Autonomy in a straight-jacket

There are a number of proposals to bring the financial affairs of
trade unions into line with corporations law - annual reports
including financial management strategies, use of accrual
accounting (incorporating assets), etc. (Small unions would be
exempt from the most onerous of these requirements.)

Reith is looking at adopting Western Australia's legislation
where unions are required to set up a separate fund for
expenditure on political purposes (such as a campaign against
government legislation, or in the federal elections).

In WA, political donations must be used in accordance with the
wishes of individual members.

The Industrial Registrar would have enhanced investigative powers
to inspect financial records of unions. Non-compliance could
result in deregistration.

There are a host of other changes imposing rules on maintenance
of membership records (for seven years), on conduct of elections,
provision of membership lists and other documents, all with
strict time limits.

These would provide employer stooges with opportunities to make
trouble for the union and transgress the privacy of union
members.

There is a pretence of placing control in the hands of the
individual and little recognition of the democratic processes of
the union - that union members elect officials to govern the
union and give leadership.

Whether it be financial matters, conduct of union elections or
rights of workers in a workplace to determine which union has
coverage, Reith's proposals attempt to remove those powers from
the members of the union and their elected leaderships.

When Reith claims that he is increasing the level of democratic
control and autonomy he is doing exactly the opposite. He is
placing control in the hands of employers and the state
machinery, in particular the Employment Advocate (better known as
the workplace Gestapo) and the Industrial Registrar.

Penal provisions

Any breach of court orders in respect of "freedom of association"
could be punishable by deregistration.

For example, a union maintaining a "closed shop" - defined as 60
percent or more coverage by that union in the second wave
legislation - could be deregistered for failing to reduce
membership to below 60 percent.

Any attempt to prevent the formation of a company union or
pressure union members not to support a disamalgamation would be
likewise punishable.

The second wave legislation specifically outlaws sympathy,
solidarity, political and all other "unprotected action".

"It is also proposed to further emphasise the illegitimacy of
unprotected industrial action, by providing that breach of common
law injunctions directing an organisation (or the officials or
members of an organisation) to stop or not engage in industrial
action is a ground for deregistration", says Reith.

Non-compliance with the stiff accounting, auditing and reporting
requirements could also result in deregistration of the union,
and could lead to prison for the officials.

Trade unions and other organisations have until November 8 to
submit their views on Reith's proposals.

The Government will then finalise the legislation to implement
these changes. It plans to remove all provisions governing trade
unions and employer organisations from the Workplace Relations
Act and to pass a separate stand-alone Act governing registered
unions and employer associations. This Act would incorporate the
changes raised in Reith's discussion paper.

It would also be in line with corporations law, as against the
industrial law that has traditionally governed relations between
labour and capital in the workplace.

The first and second waves targeted the award system, wages and
conditions and trade union rights, while encouraging individual
contracts.

Reith has no intention of stopping at three. As he says, his
government is pursuing an evolutionary process. The aim is to
completely smash trade unionism in Australia, decentralise the
determination of wages and conditions and return workers to the
master-servant relationship of the 19th century.

Reith and his government must be stopped now, before the second
wave is passed. The only way to do that is for unions and the
broader community to take direct action.

Otherwise the Australian Democrats will continue to do deals and
tinker with the edges, as Reith bit by bit puts his (and big
business') agenda in place.

Submissions to the discussion paper can be sent to:

Workplace Relations Act Team
DEWRSB
GPO Box 9879
Canberra City ACT 2601;
Fax: 02 6121 7776;
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Copies of the paper are available on the internet site:
www.dewrsb.gov.au/ministers/reith
or by phoning 02 6121 7550.






--

           Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List
                            mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
         http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/index.html

Sponsored by Melbourne's New International Bookshop
Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=subscribe%20leftlink
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20leftlink

Reply via email to