Major union support for minimum wage campaign

Picket outside Auckland Central National MP Nikki Kaye's office, 13 February

The $15 minimum wage campaign initiated by Unite Union has been given a boost with one of the country's biggest unions, the Engineering,Printing and Manufacturing Union (EPMU) coming out in support of the CIR petition. The latest issue of Metal, the EPMU's journal, carries a front-page article on the campaign and a copy of the petition. According to the article, the EPMU’s national executive is "throwing the union’s weight behind" the campaign, and urges members to support it. The campaign has gained wide public support, particularly with the recent announcement that the National Government plans to raise GST to $15. So far, over 100,000 signatures have been collected, but around 300,000 are needed by May 7 to force a referendum. The support from the EPMU - hopefully to be followed by other major unions - gives the campaign a better chance of reaching its goal. To get copies of the petition, or to help the campaign, go to www.unite.org.nz or call Joe Carolan on 029 445 5702.

Let the debate begin: Does saving the planet require class collaboration or class struggle?

by Pat O’Dea

The EPMU in their rightful anger on the recommendations of the 2025 taskforce, (commonly known as the Brash Report), have asked for a counter debate to be held.

The good news is that as well as slamming this report for what it is, – a right wing attack on working people and their families; The EPMU have accepted that the planet is being endangered, and are calling for a debate on how this could be avoided.

“We need a serious debate on how we create wealth, how we do so without endangering the planet, and how the wealth is fairly shared to achieve the aim of lifting incomes for everyone.”

However while calling for this debate the EPMU wants to limit this discussion to what they call “sustainable productivity growth” in collaboration with the employers.

To my mind “serious debate” on the, “endangering [of] the planet, and how the wealth is fairly shared” limited to debating how we can work with the employers to achieve these ends. May be putting the cart before the horse.

I think the first question for discussion in a serious debate on saving the planet and sharing the wealth in which collaboration with the employers, is a suggested course of action, should be; Do the employers really have an interest in saving the planet or sharing the wealth?

Of course as human beings whose own families lives and health may one day also be at risk from global climate change and social disparity, they can’t help but be aware of these threats.

But is this the full story of what motivates them?

Socialists would like to debate the point that the iron laws of capitalist competition and market forces prevent even the best intentioned of employers making these things a priority, or even a secondary concern, above out producing their rivals, and that by going into collaboration with your employer risks joining a mad and reckless race to the bottom.

And in fact it is this logic of the market, to maximise profits and increase productivity (and consumption) at all costs, that has got us into this position in the first place.

In my opinion for most employers, market forces prevent climate justice and social justice being of much concern at all for them. Further that trying to fight for these things in collaboration with the employers will be doomed to failure. For unions if they are really determined to fight to save the planet and fairly distribute the wealth the question is should this be done in collaboration with the employers interests or in independent opposition to them.

Task-force rehashes dangerous and discredited policies 

EPMU media release
30 November, 2009

The Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union says the first report from the 2025 Taskforce should be recognised for what it is – a rehash of the discredited economic dogma that led to the widening of the Trans-Tasman income gap in the eighties and nineties.

EPMU national secretary Andrew Little says the real question is why the taskforce was stacked with fringe ideologues in the first place.

“Given the decision to put this review in the hands of the likes of Don Brash and Bryce Wilkinson, it’s hardly surprising that they have trotted out the same old discredited ideology that got the country into so much trouble in the first place.

“If you put lunatics in charge of the project, don’t be surprised when they design a mad house.

“From stripping superannuation to removing work rights to user pays, to privatisation, every single recommendation made is about transferring wealth from the many to the few and any shift the government makes in this direction will only hurt working Kiwis and their families.

“We need a serious debate on how we create wealth, how we do so without endangering the planet, and how the wealth is fairly shared to achieve the aim of lifting incomes for everyone.

“The Brash report fails to bring anything fresh or new to this debate and just massages the old right-wing tender spots.

“If there had been broad-based input into this taskforce we might have seen some sensible ideas about sustainable productivity growth but I suspect that would not have served the government’s political purposes.”

The EPMU has a longstanding interest in productivity growth, and last year set up the Centre for High Performance Work in conjunction with the Dairy Workers Union to get workers and their employers working together to improve workplace productivity.

Telecom and the logic of capitalism

There’s nothing like a Tory Government in power and a monopolistic corporate flexing its muscle to remind you that capitalism is all about serving the bosses and screwing the workers.

So says a recent post on the Labour Party aligned blog The Standard. And it seems there’s nothing like an industrial dispute against a big corporation to stir up the centre-left “blogosphere”. Also worth reading are the strongly worded posts attacking Telecom on Joe Hendren’s blog, “Greedy hypocrisy of Telecom bosses” and the Green Party’s Frog Blog “Telecom’s great wealth transfer”. Given there’s a broad left consensus in support of the unions and against Telecom, the question is, what can we do? In the previous post, EPMU activist pat O’Dea makes some suggestions. Telecom and the logic of capitalism Published by Zetetic on The Standard September 1, 2009 http://www.thestandard.org.nz/telco-engineers-stand-strong/ There’s nothing like a Tory Government in power and a monopolistic corporate flexing its muscle to remind you that capitalism is all about serving the bosses and screwing the workers. This Telecom dispute. The engineers are being made redundant from their current roles already in batches. On October 1, all the jobs will be gone and the contract for servicing the network goes over to Visionstream. As the workers are being made redundant, Visionstream is trying to get them to sign up as contractors on worse rates than they get now and forcing them to buy all their own equipment. Cost of that is up to $60K. The catch? Visionstream is only offering 70% of the jobs that exist currently (they think they’ll be able to work fewer workers harder for less. Don’t expect to be getting prompt repairs if you have a phone or internet fault if Visionstream wins). Of course the workers don’t want to take worse conditions for less money. That’s why Telecom and Visionstream’s strategy is so devious. By making them redundant in batches quite a way out from the changeover they’re really putting the screws on financially in they hope they’ll buckle. And each redundant engineer who breaks and signs up with Visionstream leaves a worse jobs to jokers ratio for the ones who are standing strong. Forget the fairy stories you’ve been told about capitalism, in disputes like this bosses’ basic strategy is to sew fear in the hope it will lead to division. Make people fear they won’t be able to meet their mortgage and feed their kids, make them fear they’ll be left jobless in the middle of a recession, then try to divide them against each other by making them compete against their workmates for the few shitty jobs that are left. As long as most of the engineers stay staunch, Visionstream are stuffed. But the bosses are counting on hunger and fear to do their work for them. So far, the workers are winning. Few of the engineers have been buckled and signed up with Visionstream. Most of them are unionised and they know that together they can force Visionstream to break. Visionstream is desperate enough that they are lying, making claims to have signed up hundreds of engineers and threatening workers who won’t sign up, but the workers know it’s a crock. As long as they stand together, they have the power. It’s a matter of holding the line until the bosses back down, which is why the donation of $10,000 from the Maritime Workers was so fantastic, and why you should get behind them by donating too. If the bosses break these workers, you could be next. See also: Capitalism is not a love in

Suggestion to EPMU: Time for a fight-back?

The following letter was sent to the EPMU newsletter and the union’s Electro Coms Council by union activist Pat O’Dea. Kia ora Guys, I thought you might be interested in this report on the economy, just follow the link. [The article by the Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
 of the English newspaper The Telegraph predicts we will be paying the price of the economic crisis for the next 25 years. You can read it on UNITYblog, or the original]. Just like the Great Depression, after the initial crash there was a rally as the banksters tried to talk up a recovery. In fact in some ways the recession is over, for them anyway, (some bank profits have never been bigger) but this crisis is just starting for us, as the crisis is unloaded onto the working people and their families. It is in this desperate climate that the union movement must operate, from now on. I would like to suggest that we should start as we mean to go on. This puts the struggle at Telecom in the spotlight. This is just the sort of campaign that employers large and small and the government will be looking to, to unload the crisis onto the working people. In my opinion if this dispute is lost, it will be a body blow to the union movement in this country. Like the MUA [Maritime Union of Australia] defeat of contracting out of the Australian Ports this struggle needs to be made into a signature dispute, behind which the whole union movement in this country gives their maximum support. I would like to suggest a course of protest action that will neither deplete our union funds, or break the very stringent anti-strike provisions of the ERA: 1. Two monster rallies of whole union movement be planned. That the first of these rallies be called on a Saturday (which most workers will be able to attend.) 2. That this first rally should called around the final lay off of the 900 sacked Telco workforce. 3. The best date for the first monster rally would be the Saturday of October 3. This date will give time for activists and delegates from all unions to publicise and rally their members and families to attend. 4. That the tactic of this rally will be, using the overwhelming presence of numbers to lay siege to Telecom headquarters in each of the two main centres Auckland and Wellington. 5. If possible and volunteers are willing I would like to suggest that a peaceful occupation of these premises, (as has been so effective overseas in compelling employers to back down), be mounted. 6. If such a occupation is decided, it should be on the grounds that it is led and maintained by those most affected, probably a core of the best activists and volunteers from the 900 laid off workers who want to do something and are unwilling to bow to the new individual non-union contract model. (Union officials prepared to volunteer for this protest action should also be encouraged to do so.) 7. That the occupation of Telecom premises should be a carried out in a respectful and tidy and peaceful protest manner and should be for a period of 1 week (or until Telecom concede). 8. That a second monster rally be called for Saturday the 10th of October to welcome the end of the week long protest occupation of Telecom premises. 9. That Telecom then be invited to re-enter negotiations on the understanding that such disruption of their business may occur again, if they don't agree to negotiate for a better outcome for their employees, with union representatives. Pat O’Dea is a qualified electrical tradesman and longtime trade union and protest activist with experience of student occupations at Auckland University, Land occupations at Bastion Point and Raglan, state housing occupations against market rents and evictions. Pat also mounted a one man occupation of his worksite at New Zealand Steel protesting against his wrongful dismissal from his workplace which forced the management of BHP, one of the biggest companies in the Southern Hemisphere to back down. All these occupations and protests were carried out peacefully and respectfullly and ended in wins.