By Michael Bramwell
PERTH — "The Court government's attempt to rush through a 'third wave' of attacks on industrial relations before they lose control of the upper house on May 22 shows its complete contempt for WA workers. They have no mandate", Ana Kailis, WA Community and Public Sector Union workplace delegate, told Green Left Weekly.
In June, 1995, a fiery mass meeting of WA union delegates kicked off a campaign of industrial and community action against the state Liberal government's "second wave" of anti-union legislation. Five months later the legislation was all but dead, industrial relations minister Graham Kierath was moved to another portfolio, and premier Richard Court was promising workers that the bill's nastiest provisions would not be reintroduced.
Since then, the Liberals have been voted in federally, the Court government has been returned for another term, Kierath has his old job back and the "second wave" has become the "third wave" — all the old attacks plus a few even nastier ones.
The bill would place restrictions on all industrial action; pre-strike ballots would be compulsory before any industrial action (even stop-work meetings) could occur. Ballots would have to be approved by the Industrial Relations Commission (IRC) in a process that takes at least seven weeks. Then, if the vote is still to strike, each worker would be required to individually tell their employer.
If the issue remains unresolved 28 days after action is started, the ballot process would have to be repeated. Employers could sue individual workers for taking industrial action; the latest tactic of employers in the construction industry has been laying criminal charges against union officials who "threaten" them (usually by stating that if work site problems are not fixed then industrial action will result).
The IRC could suspend the action at any time if it's causing "hardship" (to the employer). Essential services legislation is being introduced stealthily; industrial action in sectors such as energy and health could be cancelled immediately by the IRC or the minister.
Unions' right of entry to a workplace to examine wage records and work conditions would be severely restricted. Changes to the Unfair Dismissal Act would put the onus of proof almost completely on the shoulders of the dismissed worker. Workers employed in small businesses would be exempted from the state's unfair dismissal law.
Unions would not be able to raise political levies from their members (including affiliation fees to federal unions or labour councils), under threat of fines of up to $5000. Donations such as the one made recently by the Maritime Union to help the Liverpool dock workers would be illegal.
The rights, obligations and the state registration of any union that attempts to apply for federal award coverage would be cancelled, and facility for payroll deductions removed.
The thrust of the legislation is to place severe restrictions on collective action by workers to maintain and improve fast-disappearing jobs, wages and conditions. This legislation pushes along at a faster rate the same logic begun under the Accord: trade-offs as the only way to win wage rises, and increasingly individualised work contracts as a key part of "flexibility".
WA Communications, Electrical and Plumbing Union state councillor Anthony Benbow commented: "Workers still remember 1995, and what stopped the legislation. Discontent needs to be channelled into an industrial campaign; that was how victory was won in 1995. Such a campaign is harder to start now, compared to then, but it's still necessary."
A Trades and Labour Council meeting on April 1 adopted a proposal for an ongoing campaign against the legislation, including a community rally on April 29 and a possible state-wide blockade of goods and services with the support of the ACTU. A mass delegates meeting will be held on April 15. The campaign will also challenge the use of criminal charges against union officials.
Commenting on the meeting, Kailis said: "The vital point was made by delegates from the floor that the union movement must be prepared to wage an ongoing campaign — continuing even if the bill is passed. The experience in my union is that involving and informing members to make the decisions is essential to such campaigns."