By Ray Fulcher
Federal public servants voted overwhelmingly in October to authorise Public Sector Union officials to negotiate with the government on enterprise bargaining in the current 8% wages campaign.
A survey in August showed that 60% of PSU members were against negotiating on the basis of enterprise bargaining, so the vote appears a dramatic reversal of fortune for the left in the union.
The officials noted the survey and the rank and file motion against enterprise bargaining, and worked hard to manoeuvre around the opposition. Enterprise bargaining is the ACTU/ALP endorsed direction for the union movement, and PSU officials are under considerable pressure to deliver. It is to the credit of rank and file activists that it has been such heavy going for our officials.
A central plank in the officials' strategy was to avoid discussion. When challenged, union officials respond (if at all) by saying that the union has no position on enterprise bargaining and no-one can say for sure what it would mean until it has been discussed with the government — as if there weren't examples in abundance.
The second element was the motions themselves and the unorthodox voting method. The voting options were 1) reject the current outcomes of negotiations and begin an industrial campaign; 2) negotiate on the basis of enterprise bargaining (the national executive endorsed position); 3) abandon the claim.
Members couldn't simply vote against a motion, but had to vote for one option. Options 1 & 3 were simple two-sentence affairs, whereas option 2 contained considerable supplementary information and was worded in a more "reasonable" vernacular.
Thirdly, the officials conducted the most extensive tour of offices in the history of the union. The officials proclaim that voting workplace by workplace is more democratic than mass meetings because more people get to participate. But a majority of those people get to hear only one point of view — the officials'. Where opposition voices were heard, the official motion was not well received.
There is well-founded scepticism about the officials' willingness to fight for any campaign they don't agree with. Hence people saw option 2 as the only thing the officials were prepared to do for them.
The officials have been arguing that, with the Liberals coming in next year, the union has to get an agreement now, which can be nd hence protect the union from the initial ravages of the Coalition's policy. They have no concept of strengthening the union's ability to fight (worn down through the years of the Accord). Their best strategy is a two-year state of grace granted by an outgoing Labor government.
The left's response was not what it could have been, even given the difficulty of organising over a national union and the fact we couldn't get to every meeting.
It would have taken a united response by the rank and file opposition to pose a serious challenge to the officials. The officials knew this and framed the voting options to split the anti-enterprise bargaining vote. Unfortunately, some on the left of the union fell into this trap — in some areas rank and file activists called on people to abstain from voting.
The alternative motion put up by the national rank and file groups lacked enough substance to be seen as a serious alternative. The officials could criticise it for failing to take up some of the important secondary issues, such as working conditions. It also lacked any call for mass meetings.
The officials have been authorised to negotiate on enterprise bargaining, but they still have to come back to the members with the final deal. If the left are serious about fighting enterprise bargaining, we can't afford to let the officials split us. The response must be an entire "package", complete enough to be a serious alternative to the official direction. It must include mass meetings as the forum for giving direction to the campaign.
Meanwhile, the left have to start the ideological debate in the union; we have allowed this to slip for far too long. That's going to mean getting out a national leaflet and distributing the information as widely as possible.
Members still have only a gut reaction against enterprise bargaining; they need solid information and arguments. When the officials eventually bring the enterprise bargaining deal to members, it's going to be presented as the only way we have of defending ourselves against an incoming Coalition government. That's a powerful argument which people will have to have strong arguments against long before the deal is presented. Above all, the left need to act in unison; otherwise the officials will sweep us aside.