Victorian Trades Hall Council. The voice of Victorian workers since 1856.

• Inside Trades Hall
•  > Secretary's Report
•  > 2008 Archives

FUTURE OF UNIONS

By Brian Boyd, VTHC Secretary
November 2008

There is much commentary and speculation about the future of the trade union movement.

Many conservative journalists, in particular, harp on about it, often predicting its impending demise, as the post-industrial economic landscape burps and tumbles into the 21st century.

They relish feverishly the fact that union membership over the last 30 years has declined from around 50% of the Australian workforce to about 20% overall.

Technological change, financial metamorphism, new delivery systems of services, basic manufacturing going offshore and the nature of work itself are some of the developments given respective levels of blame for this reduction in union coverage.

Yes, times are tough for unions.  But they are resilient and tested manifestations of market capitalism.  The union movement membership level is still much, much higher than the combined memberships of the ALP, Liberal Party, National Party, Churches and AFL football clubs!

The central task of unions is to represent workers collectively.  This is as true today as it was more than 150 years ago (when unions were first finding their voice).  For in most workplaces, workers combining their industrial power in unison always achieves a better overall outcome in terms of wages, salaries, entitlements and working conditions. 

It is therefore understandable that this core function was targeted by Howard’s IR onslaught (1996-2007), culminating in his WorkChoices laws.
Collective Bargaining was virtually outlawed.  Individual contracts (AWA’s) were given the highest legal status in the pyramid of how industrial law applied.  Further, normal union activity (representation, negotiations, recruitment, organising, industrial action co-ordination, general right of entry in the workplace) was put in the same legal framework as robbing banks!

Some commentators miss this point when talking about where do unions go from here at the beginning of the 21st century?  How will they reform, regrow and fit with modern workplaces?  How will they maintain a membership based structure?  And so on.

These questions naively or on purpose ignore that the 11 years of Howard’s vicious and ideological attack sits unfairly and inconsistently with the legacy of Australian industrial history.

Unions need to get back the hard won basic rights of workers and unions they have lost through the legislative stroke of a governor-general’s pen, before any measure with the past can be made.

That’s why the debate around the Rudd/Gillard Substantive IR Bill is no ordinary debate.  A return to collective bargaining, union right of entry, the ability to recruit and represent – are essential.  Unions are not asking for laws that will do their job for them.  They will do the ‘hard yards’ as they have always done – convincing workers to join, convincing them to act collectively, convincing them that going one on one with their employer is not an odds on bet!

With such basic activities still essentially illegal, it is easy for any commentator today to claim unions are on the way out.

Employers are always whining about red tape and over-regulation.  What about freeing up the labour market?  Let workers have the right to combine in order to get a fair price for the only thing they’ve got to sell – their labour.

Recently, ALP Federal Small Business Minister, Craig Emerson, said: “the trade union movement must continue to modernise if it is to survive and prosper in Australia’s often, competitive economy”.

How competitive is it when big monopoly companies are making billions of dollars ripping our iron ore and gas out the ground and flogging it off to China.

How open is it when the employers can use IR laws against workers every day preventing them from protecting hard won conditions, never mind winning new ones.

Emerson went on to say:
 

“Modern unionism can involve offering a bundle of services that are attractive to members.  These services can extend beyond representation in workplace bargaining to support for lifelong learning, financial, tax and legal advice and advice on superannuation, private health insurance and even personal counselling services.  These modern unions would be available to represent members not only in collective enterprise bargaining, but in providing advice on individual bargaining.”  (emphasis added)

Again very enlightening.  Like the employers, this advice is trying to deflect the debate away from the central and expected role of trade unions – collective bargaining, combined effort, unified action, into areas workers can be assisted in by other means.  Emerson speaks of collective bargaining in a tokenistic fashion and doesn’t mention the serve limitations placed on it by Howard and still left in place by his own ALP government.

Howard’s original IR Minister, the infamous Peter Reith of the 1998 waterfront scandal, always talked of unions becoming ‘services’ orientated, giving advice, financial counselling and so on.

The powers that be have always wanted to stop workers thinking and acting collectively.  They are scared they will learn about their power, economically at first at the workplace level.  But more importantly, they fear they will learn to act politically at the wider level eg concern for the environment, concern about their children’s future, oppose war.

The union movement has always had within it key elements that promote activism as a central approach to wider social involvement.  In other words the exact opposite to being reduced to simply ‘modernising’ and ‘reinventing’ themselves as a service-advice line institution!

Yes trade unions need to adapt, adjust to modern, evolving circumstances but they should never surrender their central core business – collective action to defend and win collective outcomes.  It is therefore important to win back unencumbered rights to genuine, unrestricted collective bargaining, post-WorkChoices.  To not do so is to concede that trade unions are on the demise slowly being reduced to what Peter Reith wanted – a non-effective ‘function.  Remember nothing has really changed since unions first started.

Over 200 years ago in 1799 and 1800 the Parliament of Great Britain passed the Combination Acts which amongst other things:

a) recognised the agreement between employer and individual employee in regulating wages and conditions of employment.

b) declared illegal the formation of trade unions prohibiting individuals combining together collectively to form a trade union and to negotiate for wages and conditions.

c) Made it illegal to carry out any acts which would have the effects of restrictions of trade.  (emphasis added)

The original battle between labour and capital continues.  And with the current global financial crisis, I strongly suggest trade unions are needed more than ever!