Unions, human rights and God

Eighty-nine years ago, on November 11, at 11am, the armistice was signed to mark the end of hostilities in the first world war: 60,000 Australian soldiers died and 156,000 were wounded or taken prisoner in World War 1.

Those soldiers believed they were fighting for freedom.

Thirty-two years ago, on November 11, at 1pm the elected Australian prime minister was sacked by an unelected Governor General.

And now we know the result of this year’s great Australian exercise in democracy - the federal election.

One of the key issues to dominate debate is industrial relations and workers’ rights. Today we’ll look at a couple of readings to help us look at these issues from some different perspectives. The first reading is taken from John Paul II’s 1981 encyclical Laborum Exercens or “On human work”. This encyclical built upon earlier statements by Pope Leo XIII in 1891. Its principles are long-standing Catholic principles and those core principles have not altered.

It speaks of how work unites people. Indeed, many spend a third of their lives at work. A large percentage of people meet their partners at work. Many have strong friendships with their workmates. Work unites in times of trouble - it was Brant Webb and Todd Russell’s workmates who helped dig them out of that mine shaft. At times of death, work colleagues often form a guard of honour at the funeral providing comfort to grieving loved ones.

Of course work is what pays the bills, keeps food on the table, clothes and educates our children, if you’re lucky it helps you save for retirement, maybe some luxuries and for many it helps us give something back to our community. Work enables it all.

For many people - rightly or wrongly - their self esteem is built around their work. It gives them a sense of identity, a role in their community.

The Pope went on say that the organisations that represent workers - unions - “… are indeed a mouthpiece for the struggle for social justice, for the just rights of working people”. Further, he said unions are a constructive factor of social order and solidarity, and it is impossible to ignore them. Dignity at work is as important as dignity at home, dignity in the community and dignity before the law.

In 1986 when he visited Australia he said:

Australia has a long and proud tradition of settling industrial disputes and promoting co-operation by its almost unique system of arbitration and conciliation. Over the years this system has helped to defend the rights of workers and promote their well being, while at the same time taking into account the needs and the future of the whole community.

The former Pope and indeed the hierarchy of the Catholic Church is generally not known for being “anti-business” or extreme in its political view. And nor is it. Conservative is where most would place the Catholic hierarchy on the socio-political spectrum. However, on the issue of unions and dignity at work - the church’s official position is neither extreme nor arch conservative. It is merely responsible.

Indeed, Cardinal Pell - who tends more to the conservative - expressed his concerns about John Howard’s WorkChoices legislation to the National Press Club. He argued for a “modest strengthening” of the unions’ position in Australia - not a weakening.

So I’m wondering, if comparative conservatives like John Paul II and George Pell support unions, the independence of our Industrial Relations Commission and rights of working people - just where does that place the likes of John Howard and his WorkChoices laws?

The International community has also adopted fundamental principles supporting workers’ rights and the role of the union movement. In 1948, the member states of the United Nations unanimously adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - there were eight abstentions.

It is clear and powerful in its simplicity. Article 23 is the second reading for us to consider. It says:

1. Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
 
2. Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

It is the union movement in Australia that has fought hard to achieve this - and still there’s a long way to go. It not only applies to women who are, on average paid less than men. For example, the Liquor Hospitality and Miscellaneous Union (LHMU) represented childcare workers in the Queensland Industrial Relations Commission (QIRC) in a pay equity case.

Pay equity cases examine the nature and value of work and whether it is equitably remunerated compared to other jobs. So underpaid were childcare workers - mostly women - that the QIRC ordered a series of substantial pay rises. They were to be phased in over a couple of years. But the Howard Government’s WorkChoices legislation came in mid-way. It overrode the state decision and childcare workers in Qld are now up to $70 a week worse off. And that was money the independent umpire had awarded these people who care for our most precious every day. Where is equal pay for equal work?

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights goes on:

3. Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for themselves and their families an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

4. Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Now the Howard Government has spent a fortune on advertising trying to tell us their actions and their workplace laws are not extreme - that somehow they’re fair. That somehow WorkChoices has evened up the imbalance away from so-called “powerful union thugs”. They’ve denigrated people who come from a union background in their political advertising - just because they were or are unionists.

Can you imagine the outcry if anyone launched an advertising blitz attacking political candidates in an election because 70 per cent of them were Catholic, 70 per cent were members of Rotary, 70 per cent born again Christians, 70 per cent were members of the RACQ or NRMA, or 70 per cent banked with Credit Unions?

Why is it OK to be attacked because you are a unionist? And why are unionists singled out?

Unionism is voluntary. Unionists along with Catholics, Rotarians, other Christians, RACQ members, credit union members and a myriad of other groups all share one core philosophy. We believe we are better off when we act together, rather than alone.

Indeed it is a core human trait:

• it’s why we have relationships;
• it’s why we form families;
• it’s why we join clubs;
• it’s why many go to church and don’t sit at home and pray alone in our room;
• it’s why team sport is so popular;
• it’s why the vast majority send their children to school and not keep them at home for private education; and
• it’s why we have adages that we pass on to our children like “many hands make light work”; “one in all in” and “united we stand, divided we fall”.

Put simply, as humans we are better off together than alone. We are better off sharing than hoarding and we are better off connected to community than cut off from it.

And in the workplace - we are better off as a collective, as a union, than we are one off - alone.

We were told the government listened to our concerns and introduced a Fairness Test to ensure no one is worse off. That means the politicians read the polls. However, the facts are:

• the “fairness test” does not guarantee workers will get full financial compensation for losing penalty rates, overtime, public holiday pay, leave loading or other conditions;
• there are loopholes that allow non-monetary compensation. So, that means the vulnerable will end up taking home less pay for the same job;
• the “fairness test” does not take into account all conditions to determine if an individual contract is fair. So, redundancy pay, paid maternity leave and a really important one - giving workers a say on rostering - are not counted and all can be lost;
• the fairness test does not restore the independent role of the Industrial Relations Commission and the fairness test does not restore protection from unfair dismissal;
• worse still - the so-called fairness test does not ensure workers have a right to collectively bargain - even where that is what a majority in the workplace want; and
• a majority of workers can say they want a union collective agreement, but that counts for nothing.

Of course the government will say - anyone is free to join a union. Of course that is technically right, but at the same time they are attempting to destroy the ability of unions to act on their members’ behalf. They hope that if they kneecap unions, people won’t join and unions will collapse. In response, union members voluntarily raised extra funds to fight the Your Rights At Work campaign.

You will have seen the Real People Real Stories ads in which people who have been directly affected tell their stories. In response, the government put out ads with actors and a bureaucrat - who is supposed to be independent - to sell its story.

In the ACTU’s Real People Real Stories series you can see and hear the emotion on the faces and in the voices as the meatworkers tell of being sacked; the family man who always voted for Howard until he was sacked, and his job readvertised for $20,000 less, leaving his family devastated. You will have seen the young woman who had her pay and penalty rates cut and got sacked because she questioned it and rang a union for advice.

The emotion is there because the stories are real. And these working people are just a tiny percentage of those who have felt the sharp edge of the former government’s so-called fairness.

They’ve been cut off from their work community. They’ve had their trust breached. Their connection to something that was important to them - work - has been severed.

The spirit of individualism thrives on fear. It thrives on turning one against another. It thrives on keeping secrets in individual contracts and keeping workers looking over their shoulders.

There’s nothing about that in what Pope John Paul II and Archbishop Pell had to say about working life and unions. There’s clearly nothing like that in what the mostly conservative-centre governments had to say in the Declaration of Human Rights. And there’s certainly no hint of it when Jesus said, “When ever two or three of you gather, there I am with you”.

In other words something special happens when humans gather and work together - not alone.

But make no mistake the Howard government understood collectivism very well. In fact it supported it. No problem it seems with the Australian Medical Association - a collective for doctors; no problem it seems with the Law Society - a collective for lawyers; no problem it seems with the Business Council of Australia and Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry - both collectives for Australian business; no problem it seems with the various farming co-operatives and the National Farmers’ Federation - collectives for farmers and agricultural conglomerates.

So, there’s not a problem with collectivism as such - it’s all good for doctors, lawyers, businesses and farming conglomerates. It’s just a certain type of collectivism that’s a problem. It’s collectives for ordinary, everyday working people that it doesn’t like. Why are collectives OK for doctors, lawyers and businesses, but not miners, truckies, construction workers, casual women cleaners, child care workers, shop assistants, clerks, teachers, nurses, government workers and the like?

Collectives work alright - that’s why union workers are paid on average more than those on individual contracts. That’s why about half the new AWAs have been found to be unfair - even by the government’s own unfair standards.

Collectives work because we are human beings. We do our best work when we act together.

We always have and we always will.