Date: Sat, 25 Nov 95 08:55 CST From: the guardian <guardian-AT-peg.apc.org> (by way of Scott Marshall <Scott-AT-rednet.org>) Subject: A clap of thunder (Australian miners) A clap of working class thunder Australia has just experienced one of the most significant trade union struggles since the mid-1960s. It blew up over a strike by a relatively small number of workers in the far northern township of Weipa which is the site of a bauxite mine owned by one of the world's big mining transnational corporations -- Conzinc Riotinto (Australia) (CRA) and operated by Comalco.(1) The CRA, at this and other mining sites in Australia, has been systematically working to eliminate trade unions from its work- sites. The means by which this was being done was by introducing individual work contracts. They were first introduced at Weipa about two years ago although longer at other CRA worksites. Many workers in need of work and an income were prepared to sign on. A condition of the contract was that workers give up their trade union membership. Out of a workforce of about 430 "blue collar" employees a core of 71 workers refused to sign away their right to be represented by a trade union and went of strike more than six weeks ago, demanding that they be paid the same wages as those on contracts as they were, in many cases, doing the same work. The company was paying salary increases to those prepared to sign contracts of from $12,000 to $15,000 more than it was obliged to pay under the existing industry award. In other words this rich company was prepared, initially, to buy out the trade union membership of its employees. Those who refused to sign contracts had their overtime cut back, with only two basic pay rises in the last five years. The cost of living in Weipa is high, with only one supermarket charging monopoly prices. Confidential individual contracts became a condition of employment for new employees. The contacts denied the worker the right to be represented by a trade union although membership in a union could be retained. Background For almost a century Australia's workers have worked under industry awards which were legally binding agreements or arbitrated decisions achieved as a result of both negotiation and industrial campaigns. These awards applied to all workers irrespective of whether they were members of a union or not. They not only covered wages but many working conditions as well. Another element in the Australian industrial setup was the Industrial Commission which was part of the judicial system dealing specifically with industrial disputes. Industrial Commissioners were appointed by the Government of the day and included both former employer and trade union representatives as well as judicial figures. The Industrial Commission had powers to both conciliate in the course of an industrial dispute and/or to arbitrate. Workers were happy with this setup and during the course of the post-war years many wage increases, better conditions of work and shorter hours of work were achieved. The awards, together with a well organised trade union movement which enrolled about 55 per cent of the workforce were powerful barriers in the way of the employer's drive for ever higher profits. Employers demanded that this system be modified, or better still, eliminated altogether. The right-wing Labor Party Government, elected in 1983 and in office continuously since then, was only to willing to oblige the employers. But it could not succeed with a frontal assault. Instead, a multi-faceted and a "bit by bit" process was undertaken. A principal objective was to weaken the centralized award system and to replace it with so-called "enterprise bargaining". This meant that instead of all the workers in a particular industry or occupation being covered by similar conditions as set out in the award, a multitude of separate and often different agreements began to replace the industry-wide awards. In most cases these agreements were negotiated with the participation of trade union representatives but in cases where there were no trade union members, they could be negotiated without the participation of trade union reps. Another development was the push by employers to put more and more workers on individual work contracts, thereby, further fragmenting the workforce and weakening the trade union movement. Strange as it may seem, many trade union leaderships seemed to be oblivious to the inevitable consequences of these developments. At least they went along with the changes, endorsed them in trade union Congresses and even applauded the Federal Labor Government when it gave its support to such measures. These developments weakened the trade union movement, conditions of work were lost and the wages of many workers were steadily pushed down. Workers angry Workers became increasingly angry. Many voted with their feet and left the trade unions. Membership slid from 55 per cent of the workforce ten years ago to about 35 per cent at the present time. It was on this background that the Weipa dispute has to be seen. * Workers were protesting against the contract system. * They demanded equal pay for equal work. * That there be collective bargaining agreements negotiated with the full participation of trade union representatives. For the first time in many decades, the leadership of the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) not only lent its support to the strikers but actually played a leading part in coordinating solidarity action by other sections of the trade union movement. The apparent change of heart by ACTU leaders can, perhaps be explained by the growing anger of the workers which is being reflected in a growing number of industrial disputes. The trade union leadership also have to take note of the substantial loss of trade union membership in a short space of time. It is the policies which have been followed by the trade unions that have led to serious setbacks for the trade union movement but there is, as yet, no indication that they are prepared to basically alter these policies. Another factor is the proximity of a Federal election. A Labor Party government has been in office for the last 12 years but it will be fighting for its survival when the poll is held in the first half of 1996. In worker ranks there is much disillusionment with the Labor government and a much higher percentage than usual is looking for an alternative. Maybe the support for the workers' cause on this occasion may be an attempt to win back some of the support which has been lost. Solidarity When the CRA took out summonses against striking workers which carry huge fines as penalties, mineworkers took solidarity action at other mines operated by CRA and commenced what was slated as a week-long general stoppage in all Australian coalmines. The current law also allows companies to sue workers and their unions for damages caused by a strike. Waterside workers and seamen, who are now combined in the Maritime Union of Australia, joined the stoppage and were also prepared to extend their industrial action around Australia. Maritime Union (MUA) members imposed a blockade on tugs bringing ships in and out of Weipa with CRA cargoes. The dispute was extended internationally with MUA members holding up a ship handling CRA cargo for two days in New Zealand. "Until the company makes a genuine commitment to recognizing unions and equal pay we still have a major dispute and we are not stopping industrial action", said John Maitland, Joint National President of the Construction, Forestry and Mining Union (CFMEU), late last week, responding to pressure to call off their seven- day national coal miners' strike. "We are dealing with a company that routinely practices coercion and intimidation of individuals in the workplace and which engages in legalistic delaying tactics in the Commission in order to get its way. This dispute will be over when CRA changes its =8Aways and not before", he said. Maritime workers "are prepared to take whatever concerted actions are necessary to bring this company to heel", Bob Carnegie, south Queensland Deputy Branch Secretary of the MUA told "The Guardian". Nigel Gould, Secretary of the CFMEU Weipa lodge, speaking to "The Guardian" said that the workers want equal pay and two years' back pay "and we want a future for our children." Despite CRA's efforts to divide the workforce at Weipa there was strong community support for the striking workers. The ACTU had plans to extend actions against CRA and Comalco to other industries, including power, oil and chemicals, manufacturing and all forms of transport. Messages of solidarity and contributions to the strike fund poured in from unions and individuals around Australia. Pensioners sent money, there was support from small businesses in Weipa -- anonymously of course in a "company town" -- and big businesses gave discounts. The families of the striking workers were solid. The Sydney District Committee of the Socialist Party of Australia sent a message of solidarity congratulating the workers in struggle and made a contribution to the support fund. "Your stand for collectivism, for unionism, is of fundamental significance in the fight against the de-unionization of the workforce in Australia, which CRA and other big companies have set out to achieve", the message said. The mass media has been trying hard to discredit solidarity actions and sell workers the line that contracts are inevitable and that third parties should not be harmed by any industrial action. Murdoch's "The Australian" editorial (17/11/95) was typical: "The changes are desirable and inevitable. The traditional role of unions has had to give way to the rise of individual choice, as exercised by the movement towards individual contracts. These changes provoke two key questions: are they good for workers? and are they good for the nation? The answer in both cases is 'yes'." What lies! The choice referred to is a sham. CRA management refuses to employ any worker who refuses to sign a contract which excludes union representation. Furthermore, once a contract is signed, workers are obliged to work as directed and will be sacked or penalized if they protest. "The Guardian" criticized the Federal Labor Government saying that it could, if it had the will, close the loopholes in its legislation. It is this legislation that has allowed CRA and other employers to force workers onto individual contracts. John Maitland, Secretary of the Mineworkers, pointed to the key principles unions want: "They are observance by CRA of the right to collectively bargain, the right to equal pay for work of equal value, and freedom from being discriminated against on the basis of union membership". The use of individual contracts must also be beaten. The negotiation of comprehensive awards covering all workers in an industry should also be re-established. Another issue is the right of workers to determine the trade union they wish to belong to. In an ACTU conducted ballot, 98 per cent of union members at Weipa voted for the CFMEU as their preferred union, but the Australian Workers' Union, with only one member on the site, is still the principal respondent to the award. The workers want their preferred union, the CFMEU, to have the legal right to represent its members. Some of the contract labour (called "staff" by CRA) are members of the CFMEU, but they are not allowed to be represented by the union in dealings with the company. The company must recognize their union and their right to be represented by the union in collective negotiations, agreements and awards. CRA's vision The higher payments to contract labour are not an act of generosity by CRA. The company has a vision -- no awards, no unions and each worker on an individual and confidential contract competing with fellow workers. Every worker would then be at the mercy of one of the largest, if not the largest mining company in the world -- CRA-RTZ. That's CRA's agenda. Faced with the rising anger and mass actions by workers and the likelihood of the actions spreading to many other sections of the workforce, the Industrial Commission was called into the dispute by the Federal Labor Government. In a statement of principles which are a substantial rebuff to both the CRA and right-wing government policies the Industrial Commission declared the "system of collective bargaining is an essential part of the industrial relations system, fostered and encouraged by the Industrial Relations Act 1988 and underpinned by international conventions and standards which Australia has ratified." It said that "Members of unions should not be discriminated against on the basis of their preferred form of bargaining." "Unions are entitled to be part of the collective bargaining process in accordance with the provisions of the Act and other principles laid down by the Commission." It outlined a number of forms that collective agreements might take: consent awards, over-award payments, certified agreements, Enterprise Flexibility Agreements or paid rates awards. Surprisingly it did not offer the option of individual contracts. In fact the Commission reaffirmed an earlier statement that "a system of individual contracts between a company and each of its employees is one at variance with our system of industrial relations, a system which, since its inception, has been based upon collective processes as the means of providing terms and conditions of employment at the workplace." It also reaffirmed that "Equal pay for work of equal value should be based on a fair assessment ... the Commission will consider the circumstances of particular cases brought before the Commission." Having decided these principles the Industrial Commission then ordered a return to work and further negotiations but not before it had decided on an immediate 8 per cent wage increase for the Weipa workers not on contracts, backdated to March of last year. Further negotiations are continuing with the full participation of the trade unions. The real significance of the dispute can be summarized: It showed that workers are prepared and are able to sustain substantial industrial actions; A very heavy blow has been struck against the promotion of individual work contracts. The possibility of companies "buying off" workers by special benefits has been severely limited; The principal of "collective bargaining" rather than individual contracts has been strongly reaffirmed; The desirability of maintaining the award system rather than enterprise bargaining will have also been strengthened; It shows that it is possible to stand up to the might of a giant transnational corporation, expose its vile policies and strike it heavy blows; A blow has been struck against the industrial policies of both the employers and right-wing elements in the leadership of the Labor Party and the trade union movement. However, the leaders of the Labor Government have reaffirmed their policy which calls for enterprise agreements and supports individual work contracts. One Labor Party leader has spoken of the Government's policy being one of "unhitching" the workers from awards. The leaders of the ACTU have also not made any clear break with past policies. Unless they do so, enterprise bargaining and individual work contracts will continue to erode trade union membership and strength. While this strike struggle is a clap of thunder (but not yet a hurricane), it may herald a much more militant stand by the trade union movement. The working class has dramatically demonstrated that the class struggle is alive and well. The workers have given a resounding raspberry to the incessant propaganda that employers and employees have common interests. (1) CRA is 48.95 per cent owned by Tinto Holdings Aust P/L which is wholly owned by RTZ a British Company. =1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A=1A The Guardian | Phone: (02) 212.6855 65 Campbell Street | Fax: (02) 281.5795 Surry Hills. 2010 | Email:guardian-AT-peg.apc.org --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005