ALP National Conference

A question of values

A question for delegates to the ALP’s national conference in Sydney this week:

Consider an industrial relations system which does the following:

targets workers and unions in one industry for special treatment
renders unlawful virtually all industrial action
imposes heavy fines and permits multi-million dollar uncapped damage claims by employers on individual workers, trade unions and their officials for “unlawful” actions
restricts the right of entry and inhibits unions from carrying out their day-to-day work
subjects innocent workers to a coercive interrogation process – compulsory attendance at interrogation sessions
denies workers the basic right to remain silent during interrogation
can see a worker imprisoned for failing to attend an interrogation session.
Is that what you stand for?

It was certainly not what was contained in the ALP Platform adopted at the 2007 national conference. It was not what the Australian public voted for in 2007 when they rejected WorkChoices and threw out the Howard government.

Yet these provisions are retained in the Rudd Labor government’s amendments to the Howard government’s Building Construction Industry Improvement Act 2005 (BCII Act). The BCII Act, which established the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC), was the most rapacious, anti-worker, anti-union piece of legislation in the Howard government’s WorkChoices package.

Labor’s 2009 amendments retain the threat of imprisonment for exercising the right to silence and refusing to inform on fellow workers. It does, however, allow for the alternative of a financial penalty instead of jail. The amendments do give workers undergoing interrogation the right to a legal representative of their own choice, previously denied by the Howard government. They also open the summonsing process for interrogation and the interrogations themselves to limited external scrutiny. But this is not enough. The undemocratic provisions listed above remain.

The Australian Labor Party in 2007 did not support the concept of laws that discriminate against workers employed in a particular industry. Nor did it back in 2005, when the BCII Bill was before Parliament. Labor MP Penny Wong (now government minister) stated quite categorically in that debate:

“… we do not support the denial of civil liberties to innocent Australians simply because the work in the building industry and simply because this government wants to target these workers.”

The amendments to the BCCI Act still target workers in the building industry.

“The bill places further restrictions upon employees and their unions from exercising their right to strike, which brings Australia into further breach of the relevant International Labour Organisation convention,” Ms Wong warned.

Labor’s legislation is just as restrictive regarding the right to strike and just as much in breach of the ILO conventions.

“This bill potentially puts the health and safety of employees in this industry at risk by imposing financial penalties upon employees who cease to work in what they regard as an unsafe environment,” Ms Wong pointed out.

Ms Wong was right. The health and safety of building industry workers has declined as a result of trade unions being severely limited in their ability to take action in a climate where corrupt, profit-driven employers now feel free to act with impunity.

Target is unions

Liberal Party Workplace Relations Minister Kevan Andrews, during his second reading speech to Parliament in support of the BCII Bill in 2005, made the aim of the legislation clear:

“This bill is a specifically targeted legislative measure to address the unlawful conduct of unions.” By “unlawful” he means “industrial action taken by unions”.

The ABCC’s record confirms that its target is, as Andrews pointed out, the trade unions. Nothing in the Rudd/Gillard bill changes this. Not a single employer has been convicted of a criminal offence as a result of ABCC actions, despite the high rate of deaths and serious injury in the industry. Nor has it tackled the building and construction companies that underpay and cheat workers of their entitlements.

That does not mean the ABCC has not been active. Quite the contrary. Its political police force responds quickly to employer calls to remove union officials from worksites, pull down Eureka flags and remove union stickers and posters. It has wasted millions of taxpayer dollars taking unions, their officials and innocent workers to court for the “crime” of protecting working conditions, jobs and lives of workers.

“I suggest to the House that this government has never been about cleaning up the building industry. Its real goal has been, and always will be, to smash the union movement and hand power back to employers who have no regard for the welfare of building workers and their families,” former ACTU president Martin Ferguson (now Labor minister) said in 2005, pointing to the objectives of the bill. His accusations proved correct.

Simon Crean, ACTU President in 2005, in the same debate, said: “The legislation is driven by ideology… The legislation takes away the right to collectively bargain and the right to strike. It effectively ensures that industrial action in the building and construction industry is unlawful…”

The amendments do not change this situation. Industrial action remains unlawful.

The draft ALP Platform before delegates this week commits Labor to: “Abolish the Australian Building and Construction Commission from 1 February 2010 and ensure that the new Fair Work Australia provides a balanced and effective compliance regime, which will provide procedural and substantive fairness to all parties in the construction industry.”

The draft Platform fails to spell out what is meant by a “balanced and effective compliance regime, which will provide procedural and substantive fairness to all parties in the construction industry.” It leaves the door wide open to interpretation and still appears to single out the construction industry for special treatment.

If “abolition” is to mean “abolition”, then surely in the present circumstances, it should be stated clearly that it does not mean a transfer of the ABCC to a new body under a new name with a few relatively minor modifications, which is what the Rudd/Gillard bill does.

Important principles at stake

Greg Combet as ACTU secretary in 2006, spoke at a trade union and community rally in Sydney calling for the abolition of the Australian Building and Construction Commission:

“We are fighting for the future of our democracy, we are fighting for the future of our kids, we are fighting for a fair and just Australian society. And fight we will.

“We will not be intimidated by the Howard government, or their friends in the business community. And we will fight until we win. We will see these laws repealed….

“We are clear about our values, and what we stand for. Our values define who we are and what we are fighting for.”

Where are these values today?

They can be seen the resolution unanimously adopted by the 2009 ACTU Congress. This resolution calls on the Rudd Labor government “to immediately repeal the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act (the BCII Act) and to abolish the Australian Building and Construction Commission (the ABCC).”

The ACTU resolution states:

No group of workers should be subject to discriminatory laws;
Coercive interrogation powers have no role in industrial relations and must not be inserted into the Fair Work Act;
Workers should have a right to confidential communications with their union and colleagues regarding industrial matters and to representation by the lawyer of their choice; and
Any regulator dealing with industrial matters should be even-handed, transparent and professional in its conduct and ensure procedural and substantive fairness to all parties.
The ACTU Congress condemned “the prosecution of workers for alleged refusal to participate in compulsory ABCC interrogations, particularly the current prosecution of Ark Tribe.”

ACTU Congress also called for the “removal of restrictions on and penalties for taking industrial action”. The right to strike and take other industrial action is a fundamental democratic right required by trade unions to protect workers.

Another question for ALP delegates: Will these principles be upheld by the National Conference?