ANTI-UNION ASSAULT

by Anna Pha

Without waiting for his second wave anti-union laws to be passed, Workplace 
Relations Minister Peter Reith has released details of his third round of 
union-bashing legislation. He is proposing measures to permit employer-
sponsored unions to squeeze out genuine unions, for individual union 
members to be able to apply for the disamalgamation of unions, and for 
unfinancial members to be able to vote in the ballot.

The title of the discussion paper, "Accountability and democratic control 
of registered industrial organisations", is as big a lie as the "More Jobs, 
Better Pay" Bill — the second wave — that is currently before the Senate.

The careful manipulation of language in the Bill is such that the words 
"trade unions" do not even appear in the title of Reith's discussion paper.

In fact, inverted meaning — where the intent and practical outcome of the 
laws are the opposite of the words and phrases used to describe them — 
runs throughout all of the government's industrial relations material.

This is a reflection of the insidious, demagogic and anti-democratic nature 
of the Howard Government itself.

The paper has four main thrusts:

1. to facilitate the fragmentation of unions and deunionisation of 
workplaces, with the replacement of genuine, independent unions by company 
unions — what Reith calls "freedom of association";

2. to bog unions and officials down in paper work and accountancy 
procedures — in the name of "increased accountability";

3. removing control of the union from elected union officials and members -
- what Reith calls increasing "the level of democratic control" and 
"autonomy";

4. extension of penal provisions for non-compliance — called "protecting 
the integrity of the workplace relations system".

Company unions

In the 1996 Workplace Relations Act the Government reduced the minimum 
membership requirement for a registered trade union from 100 to 50. Now 
Reith is proposing a further reduction to a minimum of 20 members for 
"enterprise associations".

The definition of "enterprise association" is being broadened to include 
workers in different locations employed by the same employer.

When Reith uses the term "freedom of association", he means freedom 
from association.

While life will be made tougher for genuine trade unions, the registration 
(and book keeping) will be simplified for small company-compliant unions.

At present one of the criteria for registration is that the proposed 
organisation is supported by the workers eligible to be members. This would 
be waived. The organisation only has to be "viable".

"Newly registered enterprise unions may face difficulties in representing 
members where there is an order in place ... to give one or more 
organisations coverage to the exclusion of all others", says Reith.

But this can be overcome, he argues, by ensuring that "orders for exclusive 
coverage do not exclude enterprise unions registered after a coverage order 
is made from representing employees".

That is, employers would be able to set up company unions, regardless of 
exclusive coverage by genuine trade unions.

Any action on the part of the union or its members to try to hinder the 
creation of company unions could result in deregistration of the union and 
civil court penalties for those involved.

At the same time as encouraging the proliferation of company unions, Reith 
would like to undo union amalgamations. 

He has already extended the time limit for applications to be made for 
disamalgamations and is now proposing that "non-financial members" be able 
to initiate the process and vote.

Unfinancial (lapsed) members should be kept on the rolls for two years, 
then contacted and given up to three months to rejoin, says Reith. They 
should be able to "rejoin", without paying a joining fee or loss of 
continuity of membership!

Autonomy in a straight-jacket

There are a number of proposals to bring the financial affairs of trade 
unions into line with corporations law — annual reports including 
financial management strategies, use of accrual accounting (incorporating 
assets), etc. (Small unions would be exempt from the most onerous of these 
requirements.)

Reith is looking at adopting Western Australia's legislation where unions 
are required to set up a separate fund for expenditure on political 
purposes (such as a campaign against government legislation, or in the 
federal elections).

In WA, political donations must be used in accordance with the wishes of 
individual members.

The Industrial Registrar would have enhanced investigative powers to 
inspect financial records of unions. Non-compliance could result in 
deregistration.

There are a host of other changes imposing rules on maintenance of 
membership records (for seven years), on conduct of elections, provision of 
membership lists and other documents, all with strict time limits.

These would provide employer stooges with opportunities to make trouble for 
the union and transgress the privacy of union members.

There is a pretence of placing control in the hands of the individual and 
little recognition of the democratic processes of the union — that union 
members elect officials to govern the union and give leadership.

Whether it be financial matters, conduct of union elections or rights of 
workers in a workplace to determine which union has coverage, Reith's 
proposals attempt to remove those powers from the members of the union and 
their elected leaderships.

When Reith claims that he is increasing the level of democratic control and 
autonomy he is doing exactly the opposite. He is placing control in the 
hands of employers and the state machinery, in particular the Employment 
Advocate (better known as the workplace Gestapo) and the Industrial 
Registrar.

Penal provisions

Any breach of court orders in respect of "freedom of association" could be 
punishable by deregistration.

For example, a union maintaining a "closed shop" — defined as 60 percent 
or more coverage by that union in the second wave legislation — could be 
deregistered for failing to reduce membership to below 60 percent.

Any attempt to prevent the formation of a company union or pressure union 
members not to support a disamalgamation would be likewise punishable.

The second wave legislation specifically outlaws sympathy, solidarity, 
political and all other "unprotected action".

"It is also proposed to further emphasise the illegitimacy of unprotected 
industrial action, by providing that breach of common law injunctions 
directing an organisation (or the officials or members of an organisation) 
to stop or not engage in industrial action is a ground for deregistration", 
says Reith.

Non-compliance with the stiff accounting, auditing and reporting 
requirements could also result in deregistration of the union, and could 
lead to prison for the officials.

Trade unions and other organisations have until November 8 to submit their 
views on Reith's proposals.

The Government will then finalise the legislation to implement these 
changes. It plans to remove all provisions governing trade unions and 
employer organisations from the Workplace Relations Act and to pass a 
separate stand-alone Act governing registered unions and employer 
associations. This Act would incorporate the changes raised in Reith's 
discussion paper.

It would also be in line with corporations law, as against the industrial 
law that has traditionally governed relations between labour and capital in 
the workplace.

The first and second waves targeted the award system, wages and conditions 
and trade union rights, while encouraging individual contracts.

Reith has no intention of stopping at three. As he says, his government is 
pursuing an evolutionary process. The aim is to completely smash trade 
unionism in Australia, decentralise the determination of wages and 
conditions and return workers to the master-servant relationship of the 
19th century.

Reith and his government must be stopped now, before the second wave is 
passed. The only way to do that is for unions and the broader community to 
take direct action.

Otherwise the Australian Democrats will continue to do deals and tinker 
with the edges, as Reith bit by bit puts his (and big business') agenda in 
place.

Submissions to the discussion paper can be sent to:

Workplace Relations Act Team
DEWRSB
GPO Box 9879
Canberra City ACT 2601;
Fax: 02 6121 7776;
Email: mdp@dewrsb.gov.au
Copies of the paper are available on the internet site:
www.dewrsb.gov.au/ministers/reith
or by phoning 02 6121 7550.

Back to index page