Unions join employers in nationalist binge

September 3, 1997
Issue 

Picture

Unions join employers in nationalist binge

By James Vassilopoulos

SYDNEY — Five thousand workers from the textile, footwear and clothing industries marched to John Howard's office on August 20 to demand no more cuts to tariffs. This was part of a national day of action organised by the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia.

Approaching the rally, all one could see were Australian flags being waved about. It could have been mistaken for a mobilisation of monarchists, rather than a trade union rally.

Interspersed between the singing of "Advance Australia Fair" was the chant: "No ifs, no buts, we don't want any tariff cuts". Many of the workers who turned up were migrants, especially from China, Vietnam and the Philippines. Most were there because they feared for their jobs.

But this was not your usual union rally. The union leaders fully endorsed the demands of the employers. The union and employers, it was announced, would send a joint delegation to meet Howard in Canberra.

Many of the workers present were paid by their bosses to attend. The bosses also organised buses to and from the rally. People marched beneath signs and banners of employers such as Bonds and Sandlers. Picture

Kim Beazley, Simon Crean and Bob Carr all spoke at the rally and lapped up the nationalism. This is the Bob Carr who supports privatising the energy sector in NSW, which will destroy thousands of jobs. They stated the ALP's policy of freezing tariffs at 25% from the year 2000 to 2005.

Nearly every speaker talked about stopping tariff cuts and how "all Australians" have the same interests against foreign competition. Pauline Hanson would have been perfectly comfortable on the platform.

In the previous week, Victorian Liberal Premier Jeff Kennett addressed a rally in Melbourne. Since being elected in 1992, Kennett has sacked more than 50,000 public servants, closed 260 schools, destroyed workers' compensation, cut $300 million from public hospitals and introduced a range of anti-worker laws. Yet, the union invited this enemy of workers to speak at the anti-tariff rally.

The argument of many on the platform was that tariffs preserve jobs. The problem, they argued, lies with foreign competition and foreign goods. Other countries are not freeing trade, they added, so why should Australia.

Tariffs benefit employers: they operate as a subsidy to increase their profits. Tariffs will not protect jobs. Employers are concerned about maximising profits, not maximising jobs. There is no control over profits, to make sure they are used to maintain or increase employment. Increases in profits are used to fund new technology, which can be used to replace workers.

BHP in Newcastle was given government subsidies and improved productivity by workers, but it still decided to shut down the plant. A profit rate of 6% was not sufficient for it, so it went ahead with destroying jobs.

Unions joining with bosses is harmful to workers in a number of ways. Instead of leading workers in the fight against employers for better wages and working conditions, unions blame foreign countries and foreign workers. When workers seek a wage rise or an improvement in conditions, they are then told these are not possible because "we" need to compete with "foreigners".

Protection of industries in an advanced industrial country like Australia adds to the exploitation of Third World nations and to the super-exploitation of Third World workers. Protectionism in the developed countries stifles industries in poor countries and increases their burden.

Historically, arguments for the "protection" of Australian industry have fitted well with nationalism and racism. In the late 19th century unions identified "foreigners" — Chinese and Pacific islander immigrant workers — as the problem, rather than the employers.

Many unions united with employers to deny "non-white" workers rights, rather than making common cause with Chinese workers. Bosses benefited from the racism they fanned by paying immigrants low wages and using them as scabs.

The same logic led worker to massacre worker in the first world war. Before that military conflict began, it took the form of a trade war, a war over the protection of "our" markets.

It would be far more useful for unions to campaign for a reduction in the working week to 35 hours with no loss in pay, and to fight job cuts by federal and state governments.

According to Teresita Carpio, secretary of the Midas Independent Workers Union in the Philippines, Australian unions need to link up with Asian workers, not with Australian employers.

"Workers across the world have many, many things in common. We need to organise together, to help each other, to organise international conferences of workers", Carpio said.

"Australian companies operating in the Philippines should have pressure brought on them by Australian unions to improve wages and conditions of Filipino workers, to bring them up to the level of Australian workers."

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.