With the Coalition government about to introduce changes to the Industrial Relations Act which will severely limit the rights of unions, the union movement and its leadership are facing one of the biggest challenges of their time.
Over the last 13 years of the Accord with the Labor government, the ACTU has been largely responsible for severely weakening the union movement. Its almost exclusive focus on creating 20 big unions and preventing individual unions (such as the Builders Labourers Federation and the Federation of Airline Pilots) from struggling for better wages and conditions outside the restrictions of the Accord has translated into an overall decline in union membership (from 49.2% in 1982 to 35% in 1994), especially among women and young people, and a greater decline in militancy.
Yet even today you're more likely to hear the ACTU talking up fee-for-service unionism and "respecting the Coalition's electoral mandate" than calling for a national industrial campaign to lift wages in line with cost-of-living increases.
There is, however, a union which has challenged this status quo. On May Day in 1994 some 40 shearers voted to leave the AWU and form a new union, the Shearer and Rural Workers' Union. Despite facing enormous obstacles from bosses in cahoots with the Australian Workers' Union (AWU), the SRWU has, since its foundation, sought to represent workers, give them a voice and campaign for their rights. Currently in a dispute with E.P. Robinson and the AWU in Geelong over the right of workers to belong to the union of their choice, the SRWU is showing an example of democratic, militant unionism.
Green Left Weekly's GEOFF SPENCER spoke to the SRWU's assistant general secretary, JOHN MORGAN, about the lessons the union has learned in its two years of existence.
Question: What is the membership of the union now?
We have about 1200 members now spread throughout New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria. Most of our membership are shearers, but we also cover some mine workers in Stawell and a sizeable proportion of the workers at Campbells Mushrooms at Mernda [north of Melbourne]. And we are getting stronger. The AWU thought we wouldn't last, but it's almost two years now and we are still here.
Question: Are these workers ex-AWU or previously unorganised?
That's almost the same thing. A large number are workers who had dropped out, given up on unions because of their attitude and inaction. It has been fairly easy to convince these people to rejoin. And then there are youth who have never seen a union official, who haven't been educated in unionism. I can't say for certain, but I think about 50-60% of the SRWU would be young, that is under 30. The youth are interested to learn about unions.
The ACTU has said that the SRWU is dangerous because we are stealing members from other unions. Yet what are the super unions doing? Those 20 unions are looking to carve each other up. The unionised work force has gone from something like 55% down to just over 30% in the last 15 years. The battle for them is to see who will get the largest share of the shrinking number of organised workers. And we are not poaching; workers — and they are mainly AWU or ex-AWU — are approaching us to see if we can help them.
Question: How do you account for your success?
Perhaps some context first. In Victoria, for example, the SRWU organises some 400 shearers. The AWU has about 100 members, but there are another 1500 who are unorganised. I'm using conservative figures here, and I'm not including areas such as rouseabouts, cooks and so on. Our success? It's because we've put the union back into the hands of the people to whom it belongs, that is the rank and file worker.
Question: How has the SRWU done this?
It's educating people about unions: that the union is its members. In workplaces, committees are formed. That process of forming committees raises awareness that the workers have some control over their destiny. The workplace committees direct the union officials, and not the other way around. The process is to get the workers active so they can then see they are the union.
Question: You've mentioned what the ACTU thinks of the SRWU. How do you view it?
As we've said many times before, the ACTU seems to be more comfortable sitting down to lunch with the business community rather than talking to its own membership. Take the example of Bill Kelty when he was on the board of the Reserve Bank, and other officials doing similar things. What are they doing there? How can they say they are looking after the working class when they are hobnobbing it with the big end of town? It's hypocritical.
I think the ACTU and a lot of unions have lost the plot. They are completely out of touch with their members. There are exceptions of course, but the Accord has made unions inactive. And if a union is not performing, that is, carrying out what the members want it to do, then they will leave the union. You can see the proof of that in the decline of union membership.
The ACTU might pay lip service to reversing the declining unionisation, but for the most part they are concerned with getting a seat in parliament. They are too busy playing politics.
Question: And the continuing hostility of the AWU?
We are an embarrassment to the AWU. The AWU and the ALP like to stand on the great historical links between the shearers and the formation of the AWU and the ALP late last century. You know, we stuck it up them in the Great Strike of 1891, but having a history is no good without having a future. In 1996, the award wages for Queensland shearers is less than in every other state.
Question: When the SRWU was formed, it was stated that you would not affiliate to the ALP. Does this view still stand?
Absolutely. The SRWU was formed because we were pissed off that the AWU, rather than representing its members, squandered our money on the ALP. A parallel can be drawn between the ALP and unions in that both are out of touch. The ALP is not a party for the working class.
Question: I've heard you mention the need for a new political voice for workers. Do you see the SRWU playing a role in this?
Anything is possible. At the moment we are too small, but even if we were bigger it's not something we would attempt on our own. We are interested in talking with others, but that's all at this stage. And most of our discussion has centred around how we can lend support to other workers engaged in struggle.
Question: A lot of flak is directed at the SRWU about it not being a properly registered union. Can you explain the situation?
When we first formed, we registered as an incorporated body. This was to give us some sort of legal standing. At present we are registered as a union under the Victorian state act which gives us the right to enter the Industrial Relations Commission (IRC) at the state level. We are seeking federal registration, but it is a long process. We need to win a lot more members so we can speak with more authority for shearers, that is, to be considered as a body to be consulted in award changes.
But there is more to being a union than being able to get up and argue in the IRC. A lot of people still have faith in the IRC as an independent arbiter. It's a joke. Conditions that were hard fought for are lost so quickly in the IRC. And here I'm speaking of my experience with the AWU, which regularly cooperates with the employers to the detriment of workers.
Question: What do you think of the Coalition's proposed changes to industrial relations legislation?
Most Liberal politicians think that unionism is dying, and the Howard government wants to hammer the nails in the coffin. They only have to take a look at what is going on here [the dispute at E.P. Robinson] to see that unionism is not dead.
We've been accused by the AWU and others that we are in bed with the Liberals. No doubt they will say it again, but I think we might be able to use this legislation to give us more access to workplaces. I know they want to set up company unions under the guise of freedom of association. But the logic of it means they will find it harder to deny us entry to workplaces, which is what happens at the moment.
And I would suggest that unionism will only get stronger under a Coalition government. Perhaps we need two terms of this government because under the ALP, people were not fighting. They were just sitting back for the most part and being rolled.
Question: Do you really think the big stick will galvanise the unions?
I think you will see a lot more industrial unrest. Now whether the unions win or not, I think they will fight. They will have to; otherwise the union movement will be destroyed.