The ugly logic of enterprise bargaining
It appears that the Keating government is about to strike a new deal with the ACTU to allow enterprise bargains to be stitched together without unions. At present the Industrial Relations Commission can only ratify enterprise bargains which have been put together between registered unions and employers. A change to this law could see a dramatic extension of enterprise bargains in the private sector, some 70% of whose workforce is non-unionised. However it will also speed up the decline of unionisation, further widen the gap between poorly-paid and better-paid workers, destroy more full-time jobs and add to persistent high unemployment.
The ACTU accepted enterprise bargaining as the federal Labor government's version of labour market deregulation at the end of the 1980s, following a period of unprecedented erosion of real wages and working conditions. These were brokered through the various Accords and delivered through the centralised wage-fixing system.
From the employers' point of view deregulation of the market for labour (workers are after all just another commodity under capitalism) would allow them to cut workers' wages and conditions even faster, especially as the threat of the sack became more potent with rising unemployment.
Basically, the ACTU agreed in Accords Mark VI and VII to employers having a greater freedom to allow workers to compete against each other. The fundamental union principle of collective solidarity was sacrificed.
A minority of workers in good bargaining positions made significant wage gains in the first of these deals but enterprise bargaining directly or indirectly (through greater use of contract labour for instance) helped to whittle away jobs and slash the wages and conditions of many other workers. In addition, the shift to enterprise bargaining allowed the ACTU to release some of the pent-up frustration of better-organised workers at the sacrifice forced on them under the centralised wage system.
The ACTU chiefs felt secure in their jobs because the Labor government legislated to give the unions a monopoly in signing these deals. However, before long the employers were demanding more deregulation of the labour market and an end to the union monopoly on such deals. The ugly logic of enterprise bargaining led to this point: As more workers were alienated from unions or became casualised or put on part-time, unionisation declined. Employers then began to pretend to champion the right of non- unionised workers to get in on the enterprise bargaining action. In addition, rising unemployment gave employers greater confidence to use labor market deregulation to increase their exploitation of workers. Industrial Relations Minister Laurie Brereton began to voice the employers' demand.
While the ACTU has not yet publicly accepted Brereton's position, erguson has said that government assurances that the new non-union enterprise bargains would not be allowed to undercut award conditions would "go a long way to alleviate the fears of our affiliates". If Ferguson does strike a deal it will still have to be ratified by the upcoming ACTU congress.
But will a guarantee that award conditions be respected offer employees much protection? Award conditions have already been seriously eroded under the Accord and enterprise bargaining in workplaces without unions will at least restrain upward movement in award rates. To the extent that they don't, and while unemployment remains high (and most economists expect this will remain the case for the rest of the 1990s), employers will demand that even this poor safety net be torn down.
The 1980s saw a dramatic widening of the gap between rich and poor in this country: By 1990 the richest 10% of the population owned 55.4% of all wealth while the other 90% shared the rest unequally. Social services, including health, welfare, housing and public transport have been cut back despite clear evidence if the disastrous social and environmental consequences. Unemployment is now more than 11% and shows little sign of falling significantly. A turn around of these developments requires the union movement to break from the stranglehold of the ALP, reject enterprise bargaining and all forms of labor market deregulation and to revive the principle of united struggle in the interests of all workers and their allies.