|
WSWS : Workers
Struggles : Australia
: The
Waterfront Dispute
Australian waterfront workers object to new conditions
By Terry Cook
21 October, 1998
Workers employed at the Patrick Stevedoring cargo handing terminal
at Port Botany in Sydney have refused to work under some of the
new working conditions in the "peace" agreement negotiated
by the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) leadership earlier this
year.
The agreement was pushed through membership meetings at the
beginning of July, bringing to an end the national waterfront
dispute that erupted on April 7 when the company sacked all its
1,400 workers and replaced them with scabs.
The assault on the Patrick workers was organised at the highest
levels of the Howard government in order to impose sweeping changes
to working conditions in line with business demands for "waterfront
reform". However it became a political and legal morass for
the government. Pickets by waterside workers, other workers and
their supporters stalled the operation and it then emerged that
the government had breached its own industrial legislation.
To salvage the situation for the government and the employers,
the Federal and High Courts ordered the reinstatement of the workers
so that talks could proceed with the MUA and the Australian Council
of Trade Unions (ACTU) about how to deliver sweeping cuts to jobs
and conditions. The final deal involved the loss of 626 jobs--almost
half the workforce-- and the destruction of over 100 working conditions,
including overtime and other shift penalty rates. The new regime
included extended shifts, the outsourcing of maintenance and other
non-core work and a two-year no-strike agreement.
The MUA also pledged to police an increase in crane lifting
rates from 18 to 25 containers an hour in line with the benchmark
set by the government. This is now being imposed at Patrick's
East Swanson Dock in Melbourne but crane rates at Botany reportedly
fell as workers began to resist the demands of the management.
Last week Patrick's management blamed the MUA's Central NSW
branch secretary Jim Donovan and union organiser Glen Wood, saying
they had breached an undertaking given by MUA national secretary
John Coombs to "accept work changes in good faith".
The company claimed that the NSW union officials had instructed
Botany workers not to work 12-hour shifts or public holidays and
not to operate machinery with reduced manning. The company has
applied to the Industrial Relations Commission to revoke Wood's
permit to enter the worksite to confer with his members.
Donovan, a member of the Communist Party of Australia (CPA),
the former Moscow-line Stalinists, is now attempting to distance
himself for responsibility for some aspects of the agreement.
He has accused the national MUA leadership of a "lack of
communication," saying problems have arisen because the NSW
branch was not involved in negotiations on the agreement.
Last week Donovan told the media: "We weren't told there
were going to be 12-hour shifts in the agreement." This is
far from the truth. The entire MUA leadership knew in detail the
conditions of the deal and fought for its acceptance.
In fact, together with the NSW branch leadership, Donovan was
instrumental in ensuring that the agreement was accepted at the
Sydney membership meeting. The NSW officials harangued workers
for hours, insisting they had no choice but to accept the agreement
because there was no other option. At the Port of Melbourne, over
one third of Patrick's workers rejected the agreement.
After the Sydney meeting Donovan told supporters that he had
recommended the deal as "acceptable if not totally satisfactory".
This was the line pursued in the July 1 issue of the Guardian,
the CPA journal, which heralded the deal as a "victory"
though "not without its costs".
The same Guardian article reported the changes to shifts,
commenting that the agreement allowed Patrick's to extend a shift
by one, two or four hours a day on an evening shift, or two hours
on a night shift. "There is an absolute maximum of 12 hours
work a day," it said.
It further reported that the agreement included a clause that
"the union and employers also undertake to guarantee supply
of labour at all time [including overtime, extensions and all
holidays.]" This makes a mockery of any claim by the NSW
MUA leadership that it was unaware of the contents of the deal.
Meanwhile, other damning evidence has emerged of the destruction
of waterfront conditions agreed to by the MUA. The deal allowed
Patrick to outsource maintenance and other work to the contracting
company Fluor Daniel. The union assured those retrenched that
they could apply for the jobs with the contractor, without losing
pay or conditions.
Now the Amalgamated Manufacturing Workers Union and Communication
Electrical and Plumbing Union, both hoping to gain coverage of
the displaced 115 maintenance workers, say the agreement has allowed
Fluor Daniel to cut wages by up to $16,000 a year. The MUA agreed
to the wage cut in the Industrial Relations Commission without
even calling a membership meeting.
However, like Donovan, these unions can hardly claim they did
not agree with the MUA betrayal. The entire trade union bureaucracy,
from the ACTU down, worked to contain workers' opposition to the
attack on the wharfies and then hailed the agreement struck by
the MUA as an historic victory for the trade union movement.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |