Comment by Melanie Sjoberg
Federal ALP leader Kim Beazley and Labor's industrial relations spokesperson Arch Bevis have finally caught up with the common view that the Accord is dead ... or have they? In an interview with Workers Online (March 3), Beazley discussed his views on a new post-Accord relationship between the trade unions and the ALP.
Beazley said he believed there has been a "dramatic psychological improvement in the state of the trade union movement". Are we supposed to conclude that trade unionists have been receiving counselling or are feeling good about themselves?
Beazley seems to be referring only to a particular layer of trade unionists. This is revealed by his view that there is a greater sense of solidarity among "people who are union leaders" who share an "appreciation of the real dangers" they face.
Considerable debate has taken place within the leaderships of Australian trade unions that are desperately trying to salvage something from the wreck created during the ALP-ACTU Accord of the 1980s.
Many union officials now disown the wage-cutting social contract between Labor and the unions that convinced Australian big business in 1983, and in subsequent years, that a Labor government would not lead to a "wages blowout".
The Accord produced the opposite, as real wages plummeted. Unions dismantled their work place structures and instead embroiled themselves in the industrial courts and tripartite (union-government-business) institutions. It produced a weak and discredited trade union movement.
As a result, most work places today have no, or decaying, delegate structures. Most unionists have never experienced a collective struggle, or have forgotten what one is like. Previously well-unionised industries such as manufacturing, construction and the public sector have suffered thousands of job losses, often without a fight.
The ACTU document, "unions@work", was produced in response to this declining union membership and in recognition that a wide layer trade unionists are frustrated and demoralised at union officials that are out of touch, are not meeting members' needs and are not visible in the work place.
A recent survey conducted by the Australian Centre for Industrial Research and Training found that blue-collar workers should be "a particular source of union concern because they expressed displeasure with union efforts and were not confident that unions have the answers to current attacks".
Union officials have largely come behind soon-to-be ACTU secretary Greg Combet's "organising model", in an effort to boost union numbers.
While this recruitment drive is largely motivated by union officials' realisation that they need members to maintain their privileged positions, such a drive is vital for the long-term survival of unions and their ability to return to collective action to defend wages and conditions.
This recruitment drive and local-level organising will only be effective in rebuilding and revitalising the trade unions if it is accompanied by changes that allow members genuine democratic participation and control of their unions. This is the last thing on Beazley's and the ALP's agenda.
Beazley told Workers Online that the replacement for the Accord under a future Labor government would include "a good structured dialogue" and the sharing of information on "the direction of the economy".
The ALP's new "reform agenda" had to focus on "training and skills development, along with new business and product innovation". He said that workers will need "to participate in training, education and retraining all through life". Beazley's "reform agenda" is simply to constantly assess the big business needs and push workers along that path.
Beazley's view that the trade unions' role is to "sell this reform agenda" seems disturbingly similar to that of the Accord period. The "new relationship" proposed by Beazley seems to be little more than an Accord with a different name for a different political period.
While it may not be a social contract (Labor does not seem to be offering much in return), Beazley wants trade unions to continue their close political and electoral alliance with the pro-capitalist ALP. He wants union leaders to help Labor get elected on the promise of worker-friendly crumbs, and, in return, cushy parliamentary careers may await the most loyal advocates of ALP policy.
Workers cannot afford to be fooled by Labor politicians — whether in parliament or in trade union offices — who trumpet "the death of the Accord" and in the same breath argue that unions must tie themselves to the ALP in return for another fake "reform agenda".
ALP policies and practice do not support the rebuilding of democratic union structures and strength. The federal ALP refuses to commit itself to repeal the Workplace Relations Act, or remove individual contracts from the industrial system. The Victorian Labor government showed its true colours recently when it used anti-union essential services legislation against workers at the Yallourn power station. The NSW Labor government is pushing through public sector cutbacks and trading off job cuts for pay rises.
Workers need to continue to rebuild democratic trade unions that allow them to determine the direction of their policies and to control militant campaigns against the bosses. To do that, workers need to ensure that unions are genuinely independent of the ALP in words and deeds.
[Melanie Sjoberg is the Democratic Socialist Party's national industrial coordinator.]