The CFMEU car-bomb hypocrisy

A former CFMEU insider writes:

So my old workplace was attacked with a car bomb last week. There are not many people in this country who can make that statement! The attack occurred in suburban Western Sydney, missing by less than an hour a community group meeting in the building.

A group of people stole a car, loaded it with canisters of petrol, smashed it through a three-metre high wrought iron gate and crashed it into the front doors of a three-storey office block. I had a look at the damage myself less than 12 hours after the attack. The picture to my eyes looked very Baghdad indeed.

Amazingly, since the attack, not one state or national political figure has come out and condemned the violence. The reason? The target was the NSW headquarters of the construction division of the CFMEU.

Imagine for a moment, if such an attack had been perpetrated on any other part of civil society. A church. An RSL. A scout hall even. Our political leaders would have been racing each other to the scene of the crime. Jostling to inspect the damage, crunch over the broken glass, comfort the staff, condemn the violence.

It would have been (mis)named as a terrorist attack. Bi-partisan condemnation would have come from all levels of government. The papers would be full of it for days.

Instead we get this ... silence.

The attack got good electronic media coverage Friday but major papers such as the so-called "paper of record" in my home town, the Sydney Morning Herald, literally ignored the attack. For the readers of the SMH and The Australian, the attack just simply never happened. Not worthy of being reported on it seems. Middle-class indolence at its most revealing.

But I am mostly angry at Kevin Rudd and our political leaders. Rudd and IR minister Julia Gillard have shown their true colours here. They are fakes. Shallow fakes. A serious attempt to terrorise and intimidate a key plank of our civil society and they are mute. Too busy seeking reflected glory from Jessica Watson, in Rudd's case. For these people, including Kristina Keneally, the puppet in NSW, condemning outrages must clearly never be about principle. This incident has demonstrated how there must always be a cynical political calculation behind every expression of sympathy or outrage. Some hollowman down in Canberra must have just done the calcs on Rudd or Gillard coming out on this and decided it didn't fit the government's "narrative." Or something. Best ignored.

Clearly our political leaders are happy to associate themselves with a disaster when politically expedient, but run a mile when its not. That's not what leadership is in my book. What a bunch of frauds.

The hypocrisy revealed in this incident is sickening. A bit of blue language on a building site and there are screaming headlines, a politicised Royal Commission (which could not find any of the corruption and organised crime in the building industry because it was only looking for it among the unions) and an industrial police with powers and an agenda that would make the Gestapo proud. But drive an improvised explosive device into a union office? Somewhere a cricket is audible in the silence.

The shocking explanation is that what happened at Lidcombe simply does not fit with the anti-CFMEU agenda of the political and media elites in this country.

The CFMEU has all sorts of problems, I should know I used to work there. But the reason a terrorist-style attack on its NSW headquarters can be ignored in this manner is because the union represents a danger to the political and media elites. Along with just a handful of other effective unions, it remains an example, an imperfect and flawed example, of ordinary people having a little bit of power in their working lives.

That's why the CFMEU is fair game.

Unions rally, pledge not to co-operate with ABCC

Nick Hamilton, Melbourne

Green Left Weekly, 9 December 2008

Over 5000 workers attended a protest rally outside the headquarters of the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) in Melbourne on December 2.

The rally was initially called to defend Noel Washington, a Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) official who faced the possibility of a six-month jail sentence for refusing to attend a compulsory interview with the ABCC.

He was due to appear before the Melbourne Magistrates court on December 2. The federal Labor government has committed to keeping the anti-worker building industry watchdog until 2010. The ABCC has wide-ranging powers that breach Australia’s human rights obligations as set by the International Labour Organisation. The legislation that set up the ABCC takes away construction worker’s right to silence, their right to choose their own lawyer, and their collective bargaining and free association rights.

Mysteriously, on November 20, perhaps fearing an all out shutdown of Melbourne’s major construction sites along with national protests, the Department of Public Prosecutions dropped the charges against Washington on a “technicality”.

The December 2 rally focused on the fact that the dropping of charges was a victory for Noel Washington and all unionists but also called for the abolition of the ABCC immediately.

Noel Washington’s lawyer, Marcus Clayton, told the rally that the ABCC was “a complete outrage. It’s one law for building workers and another for everyone else”. He also cautioned that as long as the ABCC existed it could continue to issue further notices against other unionists.

Electrical Trade Union Victorian secretary Dean Mighell, who himself had been subjected to a vicious smear campaign by the mainstream press and the ALP, gave a rousing speech and mentioned that the Greens have tabled a bill in the Senate to abolish the ABCC. He invoked the Eureka stockade as a fine example of rebelliousness and the need to fight bad laws.

Dave Noonan, National Secretary of the CFMEU Construction Division told the rally: “Dropping these charges is the first step forward. There is a will for more and more people to confront these unjust and undemocratic laws. While we do not have equality we will not respect these laws. No more co-operation with the ABCC!”

Assistant National Secretary of the CFMEU Construction Division, Martin Kingham, pointed out that the ABCC has endangered the lives of construction workers. He said: “It’s absolutely criminal! Workplace deaths have been going down in every industry except one — construction. There has been 34 construction deaths from July last to June this year. If we can’t get on the job [site] to enforce and improve workplace health and safety more people will get killed.”

The biggest cheer was given for Noel Washington, whose principled stand in defying the ABCC has highlighted its draconian powers and encouraged many to take up the fight. “These laws that were introduced are bad laws, they have to be defied and defeated - and they will be. What happens at a union meeting is nobody else’s business! These laws must be smashed”, he told the crowd.

The rally was also addressed by officials from the Maritime Union of Australia, the Australian Workers Union, the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, the Australian Council of Trade Unions and the Victorian Trades Hall Council.

The mood of the protest was very defiant and the theme of non-cooperation struck a big chord with workers.

Many workers and some union officials, however, also raised concerns that the protest was downgraded and the venue changed once the charges against Washington were dropped. As one worker told Green Left Weekly, “We should have stuck with the initial plan and mobilised everybody. Noel’s charges have been dropped but the ABCC is still here making our lives hell”.

From: Australian News, Green Left Weekly issue #777 3 December 2008.

Don’t wait until 2010 – Abolish the ABCC now!

Don’t wait until 2010 – Abolish the ABCC now!

Since it was set up in 2005, the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) has operated as an all-powerful secret police in the building industry, attacking unions, unionists and the right to organise. The ABCC has been handed dictatorial power to secretly interrogate and intimidate workers, to jail and levy huge fines, all in the interest of defending profits in the building industry. The new Rudd government must honour its commitment to abolish the ABCC, not in 2010 but now! Any proposal to introduce a new “tough cop on the beat”, as proposed by deputy PM Julia Gillard in the lead-up to the 2007 federal election, must also be dropped.

The ABCC was set up as the Howard government's special weapon against the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, especially after its critical role in defeating Howard's attack on the Maritime Union of Australia in the 1998 Patrick's dispute. It was formed out of the Cole Royal Commission into the building industry – a trumped-up kangaroo court, which failed to find any evidence of any corruption by building unions. It aims to intimidate union members, bankrupt and split unions, and destroy all workplace solidarity. $32 million a year of taxpayers' money goes to keeping this special cop shop running.

The Commission’s extraordinary powers allow it to operate in secrecy, deny workers the right to silence and impose hefty fines and prison sentences for non-cooperation. No other group of workers in Australia has been singled out to face the draconian and unjust force of the law to such an extent. Already three reports by the International Labour Organisation have been issued outlining how the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act, the Howard government legislation which formed the ABCC, is in breach of international labor law.

The ABCC has been involved in around 38 prosecutions targeting workers and unions who have taken industrial action over occupational health and safety concerns, in particular, including life-threatening workplace issues. Under the current laws the building industry is defined so broadly that it also includes transport and manufacturing workers, making them targets for the building industry’s attack dog. The ABCC’s target list includes the CFMEU, the Electrical Trades Union, the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union and the MUA.

Since the election of the Rudd government in November, the ABCC has been pursuing building workers with an increased frenzy. This points to a broader campaign by big business to create the impression of “industrial chaos” in the building industry in order justify the ABCC’s existence beyond Labor’s stated end-date of January 1, 2010. In particular, the charging in Geelong of CFMEU delegate Craig Johnston–former state secretary of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union – is a cynical attempt to revive anti-union hysteria by stirring memories of "unionists on the rampage" (when Johnston's "crime" as a union official was trying to defend unjustly sacked AMWU members!).

The bitter truth is that–contrary to election promises and much empty rhetoric–the Rudd Federal government wants to keep most of the previous Coalition government’s anti-worker laws. While promising to abolish the ABCC, Labor will replace it with a special section of its “Fair Work Australia”, which may have similar powers to the ABCC. This is an outrage. The ABCC needs to be completely abolished and discrimination against building workers ended once and for all!

No secret police for the building industry!
No more kangaroo courts – abolish the ABCC now!
Defend the right to organise!
Defend the right to strike!

The Waterfront - 10 Years On

Hanging in pride of place in the Wombat Hole is a framed piece of the Australian newspaper, dated May 8, 1998, with Jenny George, the CFMEU's Martin Kingham and others leading a beaming bunch of workers forward under the slogan "Back At Work". It seems appropriate, therefore, on the 10th anniversary of the 1998 Waterfront Dispute, to take a quick look at the "State of the Unions", after more than a decade of Howard, union-bashing, WorkChoices and the Your Rights At Work campaign.

On the Waterfront, workers downed tools at this morning and held a minute's silence to mark the occasion, and MUA secretary Paddy Crumlin dismissed any effect the dispute may have had on the union, and jobs. On the contrary, the chickens are beginning to come home to roost: #1, #2, #3, #4.

From the Waterfront Dispute, to the present day, and things continue to look interesting:
Over at Green Left Weekly, the latest news is that the NSW Teachers' Federation is leading its members out on a strike tomorrow, after the NSW Government refused to negotiate a state-wide staffing agreement.

The campaign against electricity privatisation in NSW continues, with the May Day Committee deciding to move the day of the May Day march this year in order to coincide with the NSW ALP emergency State Conference. This is no small bikkies, as even Bob Gould has pointed out.

Down in Victoria, 65 workers occupied the factory of SEP Print after the company sacked its workforce without notice and went into receivership on March 20. Union Solidarity is still chugging along too. Also in Victoria, the CFMEU is continuing on a wage campaign in the construction industry. This is despite the ongoing existence and persistence of the ABCC, a protest against which will be held this Thursday in Sydney.
In Adelaide, the fight is on to save Work Cover, currently under attack frm the state "Labor" government.

Of course, while they might have won the battle against WorkChoices, the unions (and all workers, in fact), are still up against Labor's WorkChoices-lite of "Forward With Fairness". And that won't go away without a fight.

Despite whatever good work they might be doing elsewhere, however, the unions are still a tad shoddy at dealing with Climate Change. Some of them will be at the Climate Change | Social Change Conference this weekend, however, along with others in the vanguard of the struggle to save the world. (Small things, we know..).

Rally Against the Building Industry Attack Dog - 4pm April 9

*Rally against Howard's Building Industry Attack Dog - The Australian Building & Construction Commission (ABCC)*

When: 4pm Wednesday 9 April

Where: 255 Elizabeth St, Sydney, opposite the War Memorial

*Speakers: *

*Peter McClelland, NSW President CFMEU Construction Division *
*Maree O'Halloran, President NSW Teachers' Federation*
*Associate Professor Drew Cottle, UWS*
*Council for Civil Liberties Representative*

*Plus Street theatre *

Since the ABCC was set up in 2006, building industry workers have been under surveillance by a task force of more than 100 police, secretly interrogated, compelled to answer, compelled to keep interrogations secret, all under threats of gaol and fines.

Unions have been fined up to $40,000; officials fined thousands. 91 workers in WA have recently been fined $10,000 each.

Get Rid of the ABCC
Building workers' rights
Worth Fighting for

UnionSolidarity - Libs defeated by community outrage over Workchoices.

Union Solidarity

Monday, December 03, 2007

The fantastic November 24 federal election result is definitely worth celebrating. It’s now time to reflect on the significance of the victory and face the challenges ahead.

Firstly the stunning swing to Labor was the product of mobilising the community. The huge nation wide Your Rights at Work rallies, public meetings, community protests, strikes and pickets against unfair dismissals all played a role in stopping the worst excesses of Workchoices being carried out. They also demonstrated the unfairness of the legislation and the power of the union movement.

We need to savour victory but remember we have only won a battle in the larger war. The damage done to the community as a result of 11 years of conservative government is hard to underestimate; we are in a rebuilding phase. We need to focus on the following:

• Winning back tens of thousands of workers who left unions over recent years.
• Develop strategies to get 1.5 million workers off AWA's and onto union collective agreements.
• Organise new sections of workers, especially young workers in casual employment.

The federal election was a mandate to change the IR system. Regardless of the semantics of policy positions millions of working class people voted for a fair and just industrial relations system.

We therefore call on the new government to:

• Acknowledge that union officials have the right to enter workplaces to protect and represent the interests of workers.
• Ensure that workers have the right to collectively bargain.
• Guarantee a “Right to strike”.

It should be noted that these are not “extreme” demands but the International Labour Organisation conventions. They form the preconditions of any society that claims to respect democratic rights.

All charges and pending fines against union officials and workers resulting from taking industrial action under the previous government need to be dropped. This is particularly the case in the construction industry where workers face the draconian powers of the Australian Building and Construction Commissioner (ABCC).

Supposedly the ABCC was set up to curb illegal activity in the construction industry but has focused on attempting to crush legitimate union activity and persecute ordinary rank and file union members. This disgraceful and anti-democratic commission needs to be shut down. Guaranteeing the continuation of the construction boom should not come at the price of destroying some of Australia’s best unions.

The ascendancy of the Labor Party into office does not mean the demise of Union Solidarity. We will need to exist as long as employers have the ability to fine and penalise workers and unions who take industrial action.

2008 could see an increase in industrial disputes. A number of EBA’s expire next year and workers could be more confident as a result of the federal election. On the other hand employers might try and set the tone of the new government by provoking strikes and insisting that the "rule of law" be followed.

We also need to remind ourselves that we are fighting the effects of globalisation. Employers are compelled to continually attempt to drive down wages and conditions while increasing productivity.

Over 2007 Union Solidarity strengthened our ability to respond, we improved our communication systems and increased our supporter base. We need you to be ready in 2008.

Union Solidarity has learnt over the past three years, through numerous community assemblies and pickets that solidarity and direct action works, if you fight you can win. It’s not rocket science.

Going forward we face new and seemingly insurmountable challenges. Stopping Climate Change will necessitate a radical restructuring of the economy if human beings are to survive. As Albert Einstein said “We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” If the union movement doesn’t adopt new and creative solutions to the looming environmental crisis we will become the victims of it.

The second great challenge in this country is the continuing dispossession and denial of equal opportunity for indigenous Australians. Unions still remain the biggest and most democratic mass organisations in Australian society. If we can’t use our leverage to elevate the position of indigenous Australians then history will rightfully condemn us.

We should be extremely proud of our efforts to kick out the Howard government. The election was a testimony to the decency of ordinary Australians. 2007 ended on a high note, we now need to be focused and ready for 2008.

Yours in Solidarity

Union Solidarity

APEC: Why the Stop Bush protest was such a victory

The wombats have been asked to post this contribution to a discussion taking place in the aftermath of the successful 10,000-15,000 strong anti-APEC "Stop Bush" protests held in Sydney last week, from Socialist Alliance members Pip Hinman and Alex Bainbridge, both of whom were involved in the Stop Bush Coalition which planned the protest. The detail of the debate is in the piece below, and so needs no repeating, but other groups' reports of the rally can be found here, and here.

Why the Stop Bush/ Make Howard History protest was a success

By Pip Hinman and Alex Bainbridge

Socialist Alliance

Why the Stop Bush/Make Howard History protest was a success
By Pip Hinman and Alex Bainbridge
Socialist Alliance

The success of the Stop Bush protest on September 8 during APEC was not only a victory for the progressive movements, it revealed that the mass action tactics being advanced by the DSP/Resistance and the Socialist Alliance and others throughout the debates among the Stop Bush Coalition over how to organise this particular protest proved correct.

From the outset, since the Asia Pacific International Solidarity Conference in 2005, we argued that the visit of George Bush to Sydney for APEC would be the key mobilising draw card given the US-led role in Iraq and Afghanistan. We argued that despite how hated John Howard is, he would not pull the same attention.

Given that it was apparent for about a year that APEC would be close to an election, most people (rightly or wrongly) would be more interested in just voting him out.

We also argued that focusing on APEC as a summit protest would not work not only because APEC is not a significant trade organisation, even for the capitalists, but also because the post-Seattle anti-globalisation movement had, in all significant respects, become the anti-war movement in the lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and beyond.

Focus on Bush

The focus on Bush was disputed among the left: Solidarity and the International Socialist Organisation (caucusing with each other) were unconvinced, as was Socialist Alternative at the outset.

A Solidarity position paper sent to the Stop the War Coalition organising list on May 4 stated: "The biggest possible protest will be achieved by politically building our actions as an opportunity to mobilise against the Howard government's agenda (including its neo-liberal agenda for the region) to help kick them from office and build stronger movements in the process."

However, most were convinced that having a focus on APEC would not be a strong drawcard.

Solidarity, along with the ISO, until the last minute, argued that Howard had to be the protest's main focus.

Their reasoning was that: as Australia was hosting APEC; as Australian imperialism is increasing its militarisation of the Asia Pacific region; and as it cements an even closer alliance with US, having a focus on Howard would help build a movement to throw the Coalition out of office. While we agreed with the political critique of Australia's imperialist role in the region, we disagreed that the sentiment against Australia's role in the region, and the more abstract question of its alliance with the US, was enough to bring people out into the streets during APEC.

While the organised section of the anti-war movement has dwindled in Australia since 2004, with the invasion anniversary events shrinking to some 800 people in Sydney this year, we judged that the anti-war sentiment could be mobilised onto the streets when Bush was in Sydney. This was confirmed when US vice-president Dick Cheney made a surprise visit to Sydney in February. We had just two weeks to organise a response, and more than 500 people turned up to one protest, defying the police crack down, and about 150 to another the next day.

The following paragraphs are Solidarity's position (largely supported by the ISO throughout the debates) from their May position paper, a position its members were arguing right up until the protest on September 8.

"Within Stop Bush 07 committee, there has been a perspective that focussing on Bush, 'world's number one terrorist', and doing promotional work for this demonstration will bring large numbers of people and re-invigorate the anti war movement. This is demonstrative of a tendency [they mean Socialist Alliance] that has held back Stop the War Coalition since the February 2003 rallies - the idea that there is a big antiwar 'sentiment' in society that can be brought into action simply by promoting some particular rally."

But this is exactly what happened on September 8, and Solidarity is not honest enough to admit that they were wrong.

Solidarity continued:

"By itself Bush being here won't build big demonstrations. It will of course be a particularly significant focus and give poignancy to any demonstration such as we saw when Cheney was in town."

"But for the movement to be built and bigger numbers won to the importance of street demonstrations, Stop the War cannot fold into logistics for "stopping Bush", but must redouble its efforts to creating domestic political issues out of the international situation - linking the war to prominent local concerns of the day such as Workchoices ..."

Civil rights attacks

The 10,000-15,000 peaceful protest in Sydney proved Solidarity's perspective wrong. But rather than let facts get in the way, they are now arguing that it was their focus on the excluded persons' list that brought the massive crowd onto the streets. That despicable fear campaign by the state would have helped make people angry about the security overkill, but it did not bring people into the streets.

If anything, the lightening rod that made people decide to come out was the extreme lengths to which the state was prepared to go to keep people away, and to stop people from entering certain parts of the city - the security overkill - which the Chasers' stunt so well sent up. When the barricades went up, the water cannons, the snipers, the mobile police units, and the excluded people list came out, people were rightly enraged.

But being angry doesn't necessarily mean that will take action. The Stop Bush Coalition's emphasis on the need for these protests to be peaceful to draw in the largest numbers of people, and to show up the violence of Bush and Howard and the police state - put largely by DSP member Alex Bainbridge, media spokesperson for the Coalition - had a huge impact on people deciding to come out on the day. We know that because so many people, not members, have told us.

Relating to the unions

Solidarity agreed, rightly, that it was important to involve more groups - in particular climate change groups and the unions. But they were only prepared to work with those who shared their overall political perspective.

They paid lip service, at best, to wanting to work with the unions: the fact that the couple of unions which did decide to support the Stop Bush protests, the Maritime Union of Australia and the Fire Brigades Employees Union, stressed that they would only do so if the rally was peaceful was lost on Solidarity. And it was largely us, and ISO member Jim Casey from the Fire Brigades Employees Union, who did most of the work to get union support.

UnionsNSW had, early on this year, met and decided not to allow its union affiliates to support the Stop Bush Coalition protest, on the pretext that it did not want union flags to be mixed up with "protestor violence" as that would jeopardise Labor's chances of being reelected. This was how the left union, the CFMEU, explained it to one of the protest organisers. When it looked like the protest was growing, AFTINET decided to organise a stationary "protest" in Hyde Park, on the Friday, an opportunity for unions to be seen to be doing something about APEC.

While it was always clear that the Labor state government was preparing for a huge security operation for APEC, just how big that was to be was revealed with the new police powers laws being leaked to the media, and then all the equipment and numbers of police being assigned.

The militarisation of Sydney for APEC was clearly going to scare a lot of people away from joining the protest. But Solidarity, along with the ISO and some anarchists, were opposed to the Stop Bush Coalition declaring that the protest would be peaceful from the start. For them, this had pacifist connotations, and would send the wrong signal that the protestors were not defiant, or militant, enough!

While they continued with this ultra-left posturing right up until the very last minute, it did not receive majority support from non-aligned activists in the Stop Bush Coalition meetings.

Ultra left posturing

Solidarity and their anarchist friends scored a pyrrhic victory at the 500-strong convergence meeting the night before the protest when Ian Rintoul (a leader of Solidarity) put a counter motion to the first part of a motion being moved by the majority of the tactical committee about the march route.

This first part of the tactical committee's motion (moved in the name of Alex Bainbridge (Socialist Alliance), Anna Samson (Stop the War Coalition), Damien Lawson (Greens), Diane Fields (Socialist Alternative), Paddy Gibson (Solidarity) and Paul Garrett (MUA) was:

"That we confirm the planned march route for tomorrow's rally will be from Town Hall, down Park Street to Hyde Park North".

Solidarity's counter motion was: "That we reject the prohibition of demonstrations in the declared zone and declare that we will march to the police lines to assert our right to protest and our opposition to APEC, to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to their nuclear agenda and to Workchoices and the attack on workers rights."

Solidarity's motion won 273 to 221, largely with the help of the Socialist Party, Workers Power, ISO, Alliance for Civil Disobedience Coordination, Latin America Solidarity Network - from Melbourne. From Sydney, Mutiny, Flare in the Void, and some others also supported it.

Ian Rintoul, at the time, admitted his motion would not actually change the march route. He knew that the Stop Bush Coalition had been informed by the NSW police that they would be lining the march route and that given the huge mobilisation of police, there would no chance of breaking through police lines. But he, and others, insisted that it was the "attitude" of the motion that was different.

Solidarity's motion was a posture, designed to make out that they were the "militants". This is despite their consistent refusal to take any serious responsibility for the overall organisation of the protest, a product of their lack of political confidence in the overall shape of the protest as supported by a majority at every Stop Bush Coalition meeting.

(Solidarity's lack of confidence in the rally and its political focus was confirmed again on the Saturday afternoon when two of their members admitted that they'd only expected 3000 people to show up. The Stop Bush Coalition had been publicly saying it had expected 5000 or more.)

The rest of the tactical committee's motion, which was unanimously adopted, was:

"That we plan a sit-down (or die-in) in the middle of the march

"That we endorse the list of planned speakers (overleaf)

"That we all on all groups and individuals to respect the unity and diversity of the Stop Bush/Make Howard History protest."

The tactical committee's motion had been discussed and moved by a majority of the tactical committee, although a member of Solidarity had implied on the Stop Bush organising list that the sit-down motion was his idea.

Having lost the overall political debate about tactics, Solidarity, and others, are now trying to scandalise the DSP, in particular, for not respecting a "democratic decision" of the convergence meeting to sit-down at the police lines.

This is untrue. As already mentioned, a lot of people did sit down, some many times, and a lot didn't (some because the ground was wet).

The biggest sin, apparently, was that Alex didn't announce that there would be sit-in from the platform!

After the first bracket of speakers, Alex went to the corner of George and Park Streets to organise to get a mobile sound system there for the sit-down and the middle bracket of speakers. But getting any sound to that point was difficult given the police obstruction and size of the march. In any case, the unions led the march off, and everyone starting moving, although a section at the back of the march remained at that corner.

The MUA and others organised a longish sit-down at the front of the march. Others organised their own - to make a statement that the city belonged to us, not the cops. The inadequate sound system meant that a lot of people with megaphones, including Alex, and Paul and Warren from the MUA, and the union secretary from Geelong (also a Socialist Alliance member), urged people to sit down.

The criticism that the motion's "politics of defiance" and our rejection of the exclusion zone was not put from the platform is also absurd. The Stop Bush Coalition, from the beginning, has stressed that it did not accept the special police powers and the exclusion zone (organising public meetings around this very theme, and constantly putting this line through its media work). This political line was not only put at the rally by the co-chairs, it was also put by most, if not all, of the speakers.

The criticism that the motion was to march to the police lines and this didn't happen is bizarre. The rally was already at police lines before the march had even started to move!

Paul (MUA), Paddy (Solidarity) and Alex were at the corner of Park and George Streets and agreed that a sit-down would happen when the front of the march reached the second set of lights. Paddy agreed with this course of action. Alex announced it over the megaphone as the rally marched off down Park Street.

We were at the police lines - we couldn't have gone any closer without trying to bust through them. But is this what Solidarity wanted to do?

The questions that Solidarity (and the ISO) should be asked include:

Why did they want a clash with the police?

How would that have advanced the confidence of the movement?

If they had decided to have a clash, it would have only have fed into the police operation, and it certainly would have helped John Howard in his much hoped-for post-APEC electoral boost.

The fact that the majority who came to the protest denied Howard his much-needed APEC electoral boost with our determination to carry out a peaceful protest in the face of huge provocation.

This shows that the mass action approach which the DSP, Resistance and Socialist Alliance had argued for in the Stop Bush Coalition for almost a year, was correct. It allowed the Coalition to win a section of the union movement, the Greens and other non-aligned movement activists to play a big role in making this protest a success. This is also in a context in which the Sydney anti-war movement coalition, Walk Against War, had been split by the ALP after the Iraq invasion.

Mass action approach

The feeling on the streets on September 8 was electric and defiant - but apparently not enough for Solidarity and a section of the anarchists whose long faces stood out from the crowd.

They argued that their motion was different because it conveyed "the politics of defiance"! They seemed to completely miss the fact that people who came to the rally were very consciously being defiant.

Solidarity's argument is the argument of those who wish to separate themselves out - the so-called "militant minority" - from other working people.

They believe, wrongly, that they have to show everyone else how to think and behave politically, and that this is "leadership". In fact, the real leadership was shown by those who took up the challenges of organising a protest in difficult circumstances, who did the work instead of only turning up to meetings to criticise and point score, and who were prepared to discuss with people who did not always share their opinions the often tricky tactical decisions. Real leadership was shown by those who knew the movement would gain confidence from having pulled off a huge rally.

Trying to scandalise the DSP, now, for the success of the protests back fires badly on Solidarity (and the ISO).

The success of the Stop Bush protest was that it managed, under very difficult circumstances, to bring out a slice of that pre-war rally in February 2003.

The strategy followed by the DSP/Resistance and Socialist Alliance was one of mass action: that is, to build a broad united front around concrete demands. It is a general strategy, there is no rule book to follow, and certain political realities dictate certain choices.

This is a vastly more effective strategy than trying to separate out a "militant" minority from the rest of us.

The mass action approach derives from our understanding of how change comes about, through the self consciousness and self-organisation of the working class. Our tactics should be geared to drawing in the mass of workers into active struggle and not tactics that drive those workers out of struggle and help the ruling class strengthen its ideological influence in the working class.

.

Time to cut union funding to anti-union ALP!

The Rudd-ercoaster, the out-of-control freight train of ALP electoral desperation, driven by a well-to-do bureaucrat from Queensland, has just jumped up a gear this week, as it tries to prove that it's at least as anti-union as the Coalition. We'll get to the racism later.

A while ago, the Wombats brought word of the expulsion of Victorian ETU Secretary, Dean Mighell, from the ALP for using a bit of potty-language (and daring to admit that doing his job means taking on big business, at least a little bit).

Now, it seems, the 'moral crusaders' at ALP Inc. have detected more bad behaviour from those dastardly union bovver boys. The ALP, following Rudd's lead, has announced that it plans to expel Joe McDonald, assistant secretary of the WA CFMEU. The reason? The oh-so-heinous crime? He gave a boss an earful when he wasn't allowed on site to inspect safety standards. Read McDonald's statement in response here. Personally, the Wombats think the description of any exploitative, dangerous, boss as a '"thieving parasite dog" whose days are numbered' is an artful and erudite description of the situation as it should be.

The insipid union leadership and ALP, however, seem determined to keep the second part of that phras off the table for a while. For it's part, the ACTU, under new leader Jeff lawrence (now that Greg Combet has been invited to dine at the Big Table after this election), has responded like a wet fish.

Since then, word has slipped out about the rise of Labor's great new hope, to the tune that his career has been bankrolled by his millionaire wife. While he disputes the claim, the combination of his links with big money, his attacks on militant union leaders, and backsliding on promises to scrap WorkChoices, should give anyone with illusions in the ALP pause for thought.

The Socialist Alliance his released this statement (reproduced below) on the matter (the link also has petitions on the right to strike and other material):

Time to cut union funding to anti-union ALP!
After Dean Mighell, Joe McDonald to be axed by Rudd...
Dick Nichols, Socialist Alliance National Coordinator, today described Kevin Rudd’s decision to convene a special meeting of the ALP National Executive to expel Joe McDonald, assistant secretary of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union in Western Australia, as marking “a new high tide of anti-unionism in the so-called party of the unions”.
He called on the ACTU and individual unions like the CFMEU to cut their funding to the ALP if federal Labor’s attacks on unionists didn’t stop.
“What exactly was McDonald’s crime?”, Nichols asked. “He swore at a manager from a building company that was using the anti-union police force of the Australian Building and Construction Commission to reduce the CFMEU’s ability to monitor health and safety in a dangerous industry—and for his pains he gets thrown out of the ALP.”
Nichols added: “This scandal has happened under anti-worker legislation which the ALP is formally committed to repeal, but which Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard now say they will ‘phase out’—against the opinion of former ACTU secretary (and ALP candidate) Greg Combet.”
The Socialist Alliance coordinator stated that it was impossible to defend people’s rights at work without breaking anti-union laws, especially laws as draconian as those that set up the ABCC—which even eliminate the right to silence.
Nichols added: “The Rudd-Gillard leadership’s surrender before corporate and Coalition pressure over industrial relations isn’t just cowardly and hypocritical—it’s also plain stupid from the point of view of winning the coming federal election.
“Every time Rudd tries to prove he’s as tough on ‘union thugs’ as Hockey and Howard he invites those scoundrels to intensify the attack against Labor on the industrial relations front. As a result the Coalition, which was put on the ropes by the Your Rights at Work campaign, could even make a comeback.
“It’s high time Rudd and Gillard stopped attacking unionists who are just doing their job, and started talking about what Work Choices is really doing to the lives of working people.
“For example, they might begin by expressing some concern about the work regime at Telstra, which as Four Corners showed this week, drove two workers to suicide.”
The Socialist Alliance spokesperson concluded: “The ACTU and individual unions like the CFMEU should demand that Rudd and Gillard stop their union-bashing drivel that just helps the Coalition. To ram the message home they should threaten a redistribution of union election funding away from the ALP towards those parties with a more principled pro-worker and pro-union stance.
“They should also decide immediately to hold another massive National Day of Protest against Work Choices which demands that Rudd and Gillard commit to really tearing Howard’s vile legislation—Australian Workplace Agreements, ABCC and all.”
For media comment: Dick Nichols (National Coordinator) 0425 221 565 Sue Bolton (Trade Union Coordinator 0413 377 978)

The CFMEU and NUW NSW call for Labor Party democracy

Blink and you'll miss it, but Labor Tribune carries this recent response to the ALP parachute-brigade, which is currently engaged in shunting high-profile "electable" "representatives of the working class" into ten federal seats - and bugger the wishes of the local branches.

National executive shows contempt for ALP rank and file

The CFMEU and NUW NSW call for Labor Party democracy

In an extraordinary display of arrogance and contempt the rank and file of the ALP have been disenfranchised of the right to select candidates in the following NSW federal seats: Throsby, Wentworth, Eden Monaro, Hughes, Blaxland, Charlton, Fowler, Lindsay, Paterson and Robertson.

At the ALP national conference a resolution was adopted endorsing the national executive to select candidates in three NSW federal seats. However within 48 hours, an extra seven seats were added to the list. This decision disenfranchised over 2000 party members from having any say.

The initial decision was sold on the basis of giving ACTU secretary Greg Combet an opportunity to enter the federal parliament. The National Union of Workers (NUW) and the Construction Forestry Mining Energy Union (CFMEU) support the selection of Greg Combet. Similarly we supported the entry of Peter Garrett in 2005 to the federal parliament. However there needs to be some balance and, in particular, there needs to be more respect for the rank and file members of the Australian Labor Party. While some candidates selected by the national executive process were quality, others were mediocre.

The NUW, the CFMEU and many rank and file party members regard this process as unacceptable. We intend to campaign to ensure that the party rank and file are given proper consideration in future ballots. This type of arrogance and contempt cannot continue unchallenged. This is an issue that deserves priority after the federal election. We need to make maximum effort to win the federal election campaign and then ensure that democracy is returned to our party.

RESTORE POWER TO THE PARTY RANK & FILE

LESS POWER FOR THE PARTY FACTIONAL HACKS

If you are an ALP member or union official and you support this statement, email your name, branch and contact details to Jennifer Glass at jglass@nsw.cfmeu.asn.au

Authorised by Andrew Ferguson, State Secretary, CFMEU (Construction & General Division) NSW Branch

Authorised by Derrick Belan, State Secretary, NUW NSW Branch

This is only the latest in a long line of undemocratic shenanigans by the ALP, of which the Wombats will provide more detail later, and we very much doubt it will be the last. I rather suspect that this call will fall (or has fallen) on deaf ears, but good luck to 'em.

What really stands out is, despite all the "fight for ALP democracy" rhetoric, this call is to fight for rank-and-file democracy only after the elections. The usual stuff then - never "fight for your rights now!"; always "elect Labor - then fight for your rights."

Fighting WorkChoices - direct action victorious against AWAs!

Some good news from Victoria, where the organisation once described by former Industrial Relations minister Kevin Andrews as "the Industrial Taliban", Union Solidarity, reports the victory (see below) of construction workers at Somerton over a company trying to implement WorkChoices. There have been a string of such victories over the last year or so (I've lost count of how many), as community activists come out in support of workers under attack from the new anti-union laws.

Meanwhile, community protesters weren't so lucky at a picket in Kilsyth a couple of weeks ago, where the a senior manager at Elliot Group drove a truck into the protesters - and into a police car.

"But four protesters were left clinging to the front of the truck fearing for their life. Unable to either move out of the way, or get off the truck, they were forced to hold on whilst the driver took off reaching speeds of up to 60 km per hour. The frightening ride was only stopped by pursuing cars that stopped the truck over 2 km away."

In Sydney, where things are a tad safer, for now, the John Holland Group is suing CFMEU Secretary Andrew Ferguson over the union's opposition to JHG moving onto the Federal Government's "Comcare" compensation system.

The Socialist Alliance has launched a petition for the tearing up of WorkChoices, and has also initiated further dialogue and cooperation on the left to build the fight against both Howard's WorkChoices, and the ALP's "WorkChoices-lite".

And the battle to get union delegate Barry Hemsworth back his job at Botany Cranes continues. There is a fundraiser for Barry, who was unfairly sacked on September 6 last year for doing his job by raising concerns over OH&S issues. The fundraiser will be on June 1, at the CFMEU offices in Lidcombe (12 Railway St). For more info, phone Michelle on 9749 0480.

And, now to return to our main story:

Wednesday May 16, 2007
contact@unionsolidarity.org

Workers in Somerton (a northern suburb of Melbourne) have proved that it's possible to get off an AWA and onto award rates and an EBA. How did they do it? By resigning en masse and setting up a community assembly out the front of the work site.

How to get out of an AWA.

A group of construction workers in Somerton have proved that it is possible to get off an AWA and onto award rates and an EBA. Metal construction workers building the new Coles distribution centre in Somerton were forced on AWAs that dramatically undercut their wages. $18 an hour casual rate was all they were being paid and ripped off on penalty rates as well.

Some of the workers were referred to the job through a Centrelink Job Network member. Under the ‘Welfare to Work’ breaching system, they were threatened they’d lose their benefits for 8 weeks if they refused this position. In addition, some of the workers were asked to sign a 20 page AWA which they had only seen on a computer screen.

The AWAs might have been a clever device for their employer not to pay the building industry award but the workers weren’t going to put up with being ripped off. Striking outside a bargaining period is illegal and aren’t AWAs binding contracts? The answer in the end was rather simple. All the workers affected resigned en masse an protested outside the distribution centre gates.

In response their employer sought legal sanctions against the workers claiming the union [AMWU] was organising an illegal strike. The case was thrown out. The workers weren’t on strike, but resigned and were protesting against their rotten conditions. What they hoped to achieve was to be re-employed on the industry standard rate of pay.

Still the company refused to budge. Coles was not the direct employer of the construction workers but were happy to allow a contractor to rip workers off who were building the Coles distribution centre. Ironically at 6am on Friday the 13th a community assembly magically materialized, literally from the early morning fog, outside the main gate of the distribution centre. Security and amazed truck drivers were informed that nothing would be going in or out until 10am and nothing in fact did move in or out for four hours.

Protesting by the metals construction workers and the community assembly had the desired effect. After some argy bargy with the union, Coles and the contractor agreed to pay the correct rates and the workers were re-employed. Workers on the site have scored a $10 an hour increase and a host of other benefits that come with working on a union EBA linked to the correct award, it doesn’t get much sweeter than this, they won!

Power to the union.

Union Solidarity