Society/Culture Why do the working class hate unions?

[Power Raid]

That isn't much different than what one finds in many corporate or medium size businesses.

The difference is the market place can shop around until they are satisfied. Try and find another ASIC or centrelink.

 

[Evolved1]

They don’t have any near the power they once did after Gillard and shorten set up fair work. Now companies can make greenfield agreement leaving unions out of it and a casualised work force.

Really? I think the combination of LNP leadership and workchoices were the point where the balance of power shifted.

 

[TimmeT]

Really? I think the combination of LNP leadership and workchoices were the point where the balance of power shifted.

It leaves me querying why with although minorities in both house labor did not put through a union friendly act on ir especially when we had a senate supporting most of their legislation.

 

[Evolved1]

The comment was "part of the problem"

When you are asking people for high yearly fees then what that person is looking at what value does that service offer for tomorrow but some unionists seem to think that what they did and in some cases decades ago is all that matters and while it is important to have a history just as Essendon and Carlton do but unions need to focus more on today and how they can benefit members which of course some unions already do.

Trying to relate unions to Essendon and Carlton is silly.

I earn a significantly above average salary and pay around 0.75% of that in union fees which is tax deductible. If my union was merely protecting my working conditions, I would consider the payment good value in this openly hostile working environment towards the middle class.

If the union was fighting for a significantly larger piece of the pie, the right would be up in arms demanding them be shut down.

You can please some of the people some of the time.

The workplace is a balancing act, finding the right balance of power between workers and their employers. A symbiotic relationship is in the best interests of all. That's the role of unions; since we're close to finding that balance in most Australian workplaces, I see no reason for unions to be overly aggressive.

 

[Scotland]

Really? I think the combination of LNP leadership and workchoices were the point where the balance of power shifted.

Workchoices was introduced in 2005, towards the end of the Howard govt. The Workplace Relations Act 1996 had a greater impact on the IR landscape, IMO. It expanded EBAs (introduced by Keating) and introduced AWAs and also reduced the power of unions significantly. The 1980s and 1990s were significant in Australian IR reforms.

 

[Evolved1]

It's a pretty simple decision making process for most people.

Q1. Is there a union presence in your field/place of employment that you know of? If yes proceed to Q2.

Q2. Do you believe being a union member will positively impact your employment, and by extension do you believe not being a union member will negatively impact your employment?

How many people say 'yes' to both of those questions?

From personal experience, a significant number of employees in my workplace are happy to accept payrises and conditions fought over and won by unions without joining the union or playing a part in the fight for those conditions.

There is a significant cultural shift in workplaces that is influencing the move away from union membership. I'm interested to see how this plays out in the long term, in no small part because I consider it primarily a lack of leadership issue.

There are a lot of Judas' out there.

 

[Scotland]

The workplace is a balancing act, finding the right balance of power between workers and their employers. A symbiotic relationship is in the best interests of all. That's the role of unions; since we're close to finding that balance in most Australian workplaces, I see no reason for unions to be overly aggressive.

The role of unions is to create a symbiotic relationship? I don't know how much support you'll get for that statement.

In a perfect world, symbiosis would be achieved without the existence of unions at all. If I am happy with my employer and my employer is happy with me there is no need for a third party.

But we don't live in a perfect world. Never have, nor will.

 

[Evolved1]

The role of unions is to create a symbiotic relationship? I don't know how much support you'll get for that statement.

In a perfect world, symbiosis would be achieved without the existence of unions at all. If I am happy with my employer and my employer is happy with me there is no need for a third party.

But we don't live in a perfect world. Never have, nor will.

Your employer has access to legal, accounting, and HR resources that a single employee couldn't possibly access on their own. A union gives their members a level of representation that makes the playing field more fair. FWIW I think the balance is still in favour of the employer.

We don't live in a perfect world, and that's why unions are necessary.

If you think you have the balance of power in negotiations with your employer, you're probably deluded.

I've played the game both ways, always as one of the more valued employees, and I'd go the unionised route every time if given a choice.

 

[Scotland]

From personal experience, a significant number of employees in my workplace are happy to accept payrises and conditions fought over and won by unions without joining the union or playing a part in the fight for those conditions.

I have seen this previously, thought not really benefited on a personal level. When everyone gets paid the same regardless of union membership or not it does tend to encourage a degree of apathy. When I was last a union (SDA) member most people I worked with didn't care about the ongoing agreement bargaining that was going on at all.

There is a significant cultural shift in workplaces that is influencing the move away from union membership. I'm interested to see how this plays out in the long term, in no small part because I consider it primarily a lack of leadership issue.

I too will be interested to see what the next 5, 10, 20+ years hold. Employment conditions ultimately reflect legislation. We have a major political party affiliated with the ACTU and despite a completely inept federal govt they remain on the nose. There just isn't massive appetite for IR reform (regress?) out there right now. There aren't millions of people flocking to take up union membership and unions lobbying the ALP on behalf of them.

 

[Evolved1]

The role of unions is to create a symbiotic relationship? I don't know how much support you'll get for that statement.

Interesting thought there btw. I suspect most union members will agree with me.

I'd love to see the thoughts of others.

 

[Scotland]

Your employer has access to legal, accounting, and HR resources that a single employee couldn't possibly access on their own. A union gives their members a level of representation that makes the playing field more fair. FWIW I think the balance is still in favour of the employer.

True, but none of those things affect by day to day employment. I do tasks, they pay me an agreed sum. A union would only (potentially) benefit me if I want more money/change to conditions or I am let go.

We don't live in a perfect world, and that's why unions are necessary.

If you think you have the balance of power in negotiations with your employer, you're probably deluded.

I've played the game both ways, always as one of the more valued employees, and I'd go the unionised route every time if given a choice.

I agree, but I am projecting on that point. I am not a low paid, low skilled worker, nor am I ESL or on any sponsored visa etc. What doesn't really benefit me would benefit others and I don't deny said others that avenue.

That's your opinion which is fine. In moving from one individual contract (employer) to another and negotiating internally I have done much, much better than I ever did from any union agreement - but that's not really an apples with apples comparison.

That's the beauty if individual choice. As an individual you a free to join a union. As am I, I just choose not to.

 

[Evolved1]

I have seen this previously, thought not really benefited on a personal level. When everyone gets paid the same regardless of union membership or not it does tend to encourage a degree of apathy. When I was last a union (SDA) member most people I worked with didn't care about the ongoing agreement bargaining that was going on at all.



I too will be interested to see what the next 5, 10, 20+ years hold. Employment conditions ultimately reflect legislation. We have a major political party affiliated with the ACTU and despite a completely inept federal govt they remain on the nose. There just isn't massive appetite for IR reform (regress?) out there right now. There aren't millions of people flocking to take up union membership and unions lobbying the ALP on behalf of them.

The labour party have lost their soul. They represent nothing and nobody.

The LNP represent the desires of the far right, farmers, fundamentalist Christians, and employers.

When the labour party finds themselves again, they will find relevance. JMO

FWIW...I voted for the LNP in the last federal election, primarily because the class war was a war against my best interests.

 

[Evolved1]

True, but none of those things affect by day to day employment. I do tasks, they pay me an agreed sum. A union would only (potentially) benefit me if I want more money/change to conditions or I am let go.

I think of union membership in relation to private healthcare. Neither one will benefit you in your regular daily life, but they're a great safety net if/when you need them. It reflects the difference between long term vs short term thinking imo.

I agree, but I am projecting on that point. I am not a low paid, low skilled worker, nor am I ESL or on any sponsored visa etc. What doesn't really benefit me would benefit others and I don't deny said others that avenue.

That's your opinion which is fine. In moving from one individual contract (employer) to another and negotiating internally I have done much, much better than I ever did from any union agreement - but that's not really an apples with apples comparison.

That's the beauty if individual choice. As an individual you a free to join a union. As am I, I just choose not to.

FWIW I earn 6 figures in a unionised role that my employer has tried (so far unsuccessfully) to move into a professional non-union job description. I'm not sufficiently skilled in employment-negotiation to find my way to the same working conditions and remuneration on my own and I'm more than aware of my limitations in that field.

I was amongst the most highly paid employees (a long time ago) at a small company that wasn't unionised, then moved to a unionised company on higher pay with far better working conditions and less responsibility.

Once you go union, you never go back!

If my individual choice gave me the same level of remuneration and working conditions, I'd be with you.

In the same way that I leave my taxes with an accountant to find my best outcome, I leave my employment conditions to my union. That's the beauty of collective negotiation.

 

[DangerousD]

Beware those that pretend to help you


Govt fks over aborigines and takes their land

Church fks your kids

Unions steal your opportunities, keep the unemployed down........who do you think pays for their clip?

Unions have a role to play, an important role. But like the IRA, the cause becomes themselves.



Keep unions but regulate with an iron fist

Have you had many dealings with unions before? Whilst I agree they have a big part to play and I’m a unionist, I acknowledge many in the industry/movement are there to feather their own nest, just like politicians. I don’t understand your comment about unions keeping the unemployed down, can you elaborate?

I’m not sure how you would regulate against unions as if we are talking about a liberal government, the eroding of union powers is the first step to eroding workers rights. If the people who are regulating are against the industry they are regulating, it will have not be in their best interests and not the members.

 

[DangerousD]

What are their big successes in the last 30 or 40 years?

Portable long service leave is a relatively new concept that is now spreading across multiple industries.
Maternity leave is a new concept that is becoming the norm, at a guess I’d say this is in the last 5-10 years
Superannuation was only made compulsory in Australia in 1991
Lots of workplaces now include domestic violence leave
Lots of industries now allow the purchase of extra leave or the use of flexi time

I can’t speak for all unions but my pay has continually grown over the last 10 years which is in contrast to Australia as a whole.

Whilst a lot of the benefits fought for have been around for quite a while, maintaining them and not having them watered down is a constant battle.

 

[DangerousD]

As a man in his mid thirties, I have had many jobs, here and in the UK, all of my main jobs in Australia have been unionised or fallen under an EBA, all of which, have paid really well and had good conditions.
When I found myself out of work and in sectors without a union presence, the pay was atrocious and the rooting by employers was rife.

Whilst I don’t support union delegates abusing their position of power, people feathering their own nests and thugs and criminal behaviour, I’ve seen first hand the type of pay and conditions that will come about over time if unions are eroded.

I am totally dismayed that despite Australian wages across the board being stagnant for years, that we voted in a party who said they will raise wages, although they abolished penalty rates and want to dismantle unions.

 

[Power Raid]

Have you had many dealings with unions before? Whilst I agree they have a big part to play and I’m a unionist, I acknowledge many in the industry/movement are there to feather their own nest, just like politicians. I don’t understand your comment about unions keeping the unemployed down, can you elaborate?

I’m not sure how you would regulate against unions as if we are talking about a liberal government, the eroding of union powers is the first step to eroding workers rights. If the people who are regulating are against the industry they are regulating, it will have not be in their best interests and not the members.

There are two ways unions keep the poor down.......which is essential for their existence.

1) the economic principles of elasticity. Essentially pricing people out of the market.

FYI - I don’t have an issue with this as I think the integration of work and social welfare can address this.

2) corrupt unions need corrupt industry participants to survive. We see this in the building industry and the cost is the non-corrupt industry players are squeezed out by the union.

This results unless economic activity (construction) which means less jobs.

It also means less constructed buildings and higher costs of construction leading to higher rents, leading to less economic activity (retail and admin) meaning less jobs.


Regulation should be about protecting workers rights from unions.



There are good unions and bad unions. I’m old enough to have had experience with the painters and dockers and the BLF through family. These have evolved into the modern corrupt unions cited in the royal commission. Staff on my mine sites have requested gates to protect them from one of these unions.

Whilst mates from my navy days now work with the other and shake their head at how they killed they golden goose.

Being a member of a union is fine.

being a member of one of the criminal unions, is someone that lacks compassion to the most vulnerable people in our society, greedy, self centred and has no respect for others.

 

[Scotland]

I think of union membership in relation to private healthcare. Neither one will benefit you in your regular daily life, but they're a great safety net if/when you need them. It reflects the difference between long term vs short term thinking imo.

It's a good comparison, and just like private health cover union membership isn't something you need to have in Australia. It's a nice to have and for a lot of people a no brainer in terms of tax treatment, but we do still have a public health system open to all.

Other than the tax concession why do people take up private health cover but not union membership? IIRC uptake of private health cover is on the decline also.

 

[Taylor]

Mobility is actually the means by which conditions will improve the fastest, but also the means by which they will worsen the fastest.

As long as it's coupled with competition for labor then it's a recipe for really nice offers of employment.

 

[DaRick]

That isn't much different than what one finds in many corporate or medium size businesses.

To a lesser extent you also see it in poorly-run small businesses (and there are quite a few).

 

[Scotland]

Small businesses come and go a lot more regularly.

Australia has Coles, Woolies, Aldi, IGA and that's about it. I don't count subsidiaries of each as any different. Coles and Woolies in particular are big machines with tens of thousands of employees. It would a lot for one of them to go under and they wield a lot of influence on retail centres etc.

Contrast that with cafes, specialty shops etc. around them. They are always coming and going. They aren't bogged down in internal processes and bargaining agreements etc. They live and die by their own cash flow. Have a poor year or make some poor decisions and you either put more of your own money in or you close the doors. No asset write offs and flowery statements to shareholders.

 

[Dacksaredown]

Staff on my mine sites have requested gates to protect them from one of these unions.

The poor scabs. You’re a top bloke for looking after them. Let’s hope they buy you a Christmas present.

 

[Power Raid]

The poor scabs. You’re a top bloke for looking after them. Let’s hope they buy you a Christmas present.

Typical union mentality. Looking down upon those who don’t want to be brutalised or threatened by pathetic thugs.

 

[Dacksaredown]

Typical union mentality. Looking down upon those who don’t want to be brutalised or threatened by pathetic thugs.

Nah, I look down upon them because they’re scabs. Can’t get much lower.

 

[Power Raid]

Nah, I look down upon them because they’re scabs. Can’t get much lower.

Why are they scabs? What is the definition or action that labels them that?