Page 5 - Newsletter#12 FinalFinalVersionPDF_Neat
P. 5

The line is constantly pushed that the Patricks dispute in   The R&F Newsletter doesn’t claim to know which view is
    1998 was about waterfront industry reform. In reality, it   the more correct of the two. However, we are in a position
    was driven by pure anti-union ideology on the part of the   to  comment  on  the  way  in  which  such  decisions  are
    Howard/Reith  government  with  the  intent  of  destroying   made. Despite views to the contrary, under its rules the
    the MUA and driving a stake into the heart of the trade   MUA has a devolved management structure in which the
    union movement as a whole.                                National Office provides support to the branches, not the
                                                              other way around.
    Positive and constructive reform benefiting the nation, the
    industry,  and  the  ‘wharfies’  was  achieved  on  the   In other words, a bottom-up approach adopted, indeed
    Australian waterfront during the years 1989-1992 under    demanded by virtue of the WWF being a federation of,
    the auspices of the Waterfront Industry Reform Authority   originally, port-based branches and subsequently, State
    (WIRA) process. Too long to discuss here but forms part   based  branches.  This  is  the  direct  opposite  of  branch
    of our story on Tas Bull, one of the great leaders of the   management within the SUA where decisions were very
    union at a time of momentous change.                      much imposed from the top down.

    Major changes were also occurring at the time in respect   In the last 20 years, despite its rules structure, the MUA
    of port authority operations around the country and where   as  moved  far  closer  to  the  SUA  system  of  centralised
    ACTU affiliate unions largely agreed to transfer their port   control  from  the  top  down  than  is  healthy  for  the
    authority  members  to  the  WWF  as  part  of  the  move   development and progress of the organisation and, while
    towards industry unionism. – it was not a matter of the   not part of this story, has very much led to the cronyism
    Commission  favouring  the  maritime  unions  as  Carr    and patronage that has pervaded the whole of the union
    suggested in respond to his life membership award.        for far too long.

    Nor should it be understood by reading Carr’s comments    The branch legal officer’s position is clearly a professional
    that  in  signing-up  port  authority  employees,  the  WWF   appointment, and in this case the National Legal Director
    were  organising  non-union  areas.  Virtually  all  port   should  be  involved  in  the  appointment,  including  in
    authority  employees  were  members  of  their  respective   determining job descriptions and selection criteria against
    unions and in many cases, proudly so. Nevertheless, it    which all candidates are assessed by a selection panel.
    was the general view of the ACTU affiliates that the future
    industrial  interests  of  this  relatively  small  group  of   If there is a selection panel, it is assumed at least one
    employees  would  be  best  served  by  the  one,  single   senior  national  official  sits  on  the  panel  along  with  the
    industry union.                                           legal  director.  Where  appointments  relate  to  branch
                                                              positions, the relevant Branch Secretary should also be a
    Despite  many  port  authority  rank  and  file  members   member of the selection panel as well as, being involved
    becoming effective MUA delegates, none has ever been      in reviewing the job description and the selection criteria.
    given the opportunity to move up the leadership ladder as
    part of further integrating port workers into the union as   The  Branch  Secretary  is  responsible  for  running  the
    intended by Tas Bull and John Coombs. This aspiration     branch and responsibilities of this kind form an essential
    went completely out of the window with the ascension of   element  of  the  Branch  Secretary’s  own  personal
    Padraig Crumlin, and the union has lost as a result.      development  and  growth  in  an  important  leadership
                                                              position within the union.
    Footnote: The right to MUA representation was initially
    excluded  from  some  ports,  for  example,  Cairns  and   This  is  a  simple  reform  which  the  National  Secretary
    Mackay because ownership rested with the Qld Airports     should be capable of executing for the future. If not, the
    Corporation which entity didn’t fit the description of a port   National Council should assert itself. This is why National
    authority. That is no longer the situation and should be   Council  exists  with  the  majority  of  its  members
    further  investigated  along  with  other  Australian  ports   representing the interests of its branches. This is the very
    excluded at that time.                                    essence of a devolved management structure.

    The  publishers  acknowledge  other  contributors  to  the   This is not about pitting national officers against branch
    Newsletters in this edition.                              officers, there is little if any reason, why younger national
                                                              officers should not support such a reform. Most of them
    Branch Appointments..                                     have  just  recently  been  promoted  from  their  branch
                                                              positions and should clearly see the merits of the reform
    Lastly,  the  latest  edition  of  the  Qld  Branch  News  also   proposed.
    carried a story about the forthcoming employment of a
    new Branch Legal Officer.  The Acting Branch Secretary    Other Issues.
    wrote a fulsome appreciation of the work of the employee
    who previously undertook much of this work and who is     Outlining the Cruise industry progress, it was good to see
    to be replaced by the new appointment. Upon reading the   the response to our previous enquiries and suggestions
    report a reader wouldn’t be blamed for thinking that the   in establishing a task force to seek MUA Seafarers work
    Acting Branch Secretary was not altogether pleased with   in this lucrative market for Cruise lines.
    the  national  decision  to  replace  the  existing  branch
    employee.                                                 Page.2
   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10