An article by Michael Duffy in yesterday's SMH drove home why the unions are so unpopular with a large proportion of the public, and why they should tread lightly when formulating their response to the government's upcoming IR changes.
His observations about the NSW Teachers' Federation are all too true. All parents with kids at school are aware of how disruptive teachers' industrial action can be.
Let's start with the stopwork meeting, for which teachers were not paid. The big question is why it was held in school time. Clearly it wasn't to put pressure on the Howard Government: no one could believe the event would make the slightest difference to the proposed laws. Was it because teachers are too busy to hold meetings in their own time? Unlikely. Most teachers stop work by 3.30pm: why wasn't the meeting held at 4pm? Or next week, when teachers will be on holidays? Why not take a few hours from there rather than inconvenience parents?
It's a good question. Many people have issues with the government's proposals, so why piss these same people off by unthinking industrial action?
The Teachers' Federation aside, unions as a collective body have realised that the strike weapon is no longer effective. Besides not having the workforce clout to pull off a meaningful general strike, they know that inconveniencing the public will not help their cause. Hence we have a media campaign with clever adds bringing the issue into peoples' homes.
The Australian Workplace Agreements (AWA), the government's preferred vehicle for IR change, has been unpopular, with only 2.5% of the workforce covered by them. The unions need to increase the public's awareness of just what's involved with AWAs. With the scrapping of the 'no disadvantage test,' the employer is now free to rewrite employment conditions that cut standing work conditions. Good economic times won't last forever, and, during the inevitable event of a downturn and higher unemployment, workers will be without any meaningful safeguards in place to prevent the lowering of wages and conditions.
The smart way to get the message across is to ignore calls from the more militant sections of the union movement for industrial action. Better to keep the workers at work, step up the advertisments and hold public demonstrations during the weekend. Keeping inconvenience to a minumum is the key to keeping the public onside.
Update: It looks as though common sense is prevailing within the Union Movement. John Quiggin spotted unionists handing out information at the Brisbane AFL game last night.
Good to note JQ's an AFL follower. Lucky for him that his team did better than mine.
I think you're right - given that Howard has control of the Senate this one will be a battle of public opinion if it is not just a fait accompli.
The unions are going to have to be quite clever about this if they are going to get anywhere.
Michael Duffy's article showed his ignorance of the facts and placed him alongside most journalists on this issue.
1. The NSW Teachers' Federation did not set the time for the stopwork. It wasn't a TEACHERS stop work meeting. It was a meeting for ALL unionists and concerned workers, and as a result it would have been impossible for the Federation not to endorse the meetings. You know, power in unity!
2. No parent was disadvantaged as ALL schools remained open due to a Federation directive to maintain minimal supervision in schools.
3. Duffy's sneer at teachers' workloads, via his 3.30pm and holiday references, are not supported by any study. Teachers are some of the hardest workers in our community.
4. His attached cartoon with the word "education" being rubbed out on a blackboard is insulting to the hardworking teachers.
As for your thoughts, the recent polling shows that unions are not unpopular and your reference to "unthinking industrial action" is a joke. Do you want us to all hide at home and hope nothing will happen to our working conditions. The TV ads were partly funded by the "unthinking" Federation. The "unthinking" Federation is also one of the most powerful unions in Australia, constanting helping not only their own members but also other workers. You are going to need them in this struggle against Howard and they are going to be targetted by the Duffy's of the world as these right wingers see them as one of the main barriers to the exploitation of workers in this nation. Long shall the barrier remain strong. I've never visited this site before. I was just searching to see if anyone on the net actually saw through Duffy's disgusting article. You obviously took his bait. Let's hope we still have some community members with a bit more insight than that out there or we are surely doomed.
Just one more point on this. After a further search I found this, on the "unthinking" Federation site no less. This is a quote from the former NSW Education Minister John Watkins in 2002. The "they" he refers to are a handful of journalists he names including Michael Duffy.
Quote: "But they make their comments deliberately with malicious intent. They are driven by that barren economic rationalist ideology that is now they see fitting into schools. They have a desire to crush the Teachers Federation, it is clear, to change the output of the public school system that has been characterised by a liberal respect for the views of others, and tolerance, and support for multiculturalism, and a more collective view of the world. They want to change that and their ideas are given support and currency by the Federal Government. And their plan is deliberate and in some ways it is working because you can't read that day in day out without it impacting on the minds and the views of a lot of people out there in the wider community that don't know education well."
Nathan ..... Gosh! Actually, I support whole heartedly the right of association in the workplace. I'm impressed with the way the union movement as a whole have pressed their case so far.
I was a union official in a large industrial workplace for a lot of years. I'm certainly not anti-union but I am concerned that the ratbag element in the movement may blow it all by trying to organise disruptive industrial action.
Duffy's article did strike a chord, though. As a parent, I think the Teacher's Federation often oversteps what is reasonable when it comes to defending (as they have every right to do) the conditions of their members.
One point that Duffy made which I didn't mention above is the Federation's defence of the 'pupil free day.' If teachers really want to be taken seriously, then this ridiculous perk should be removed from the school term.
The Federation's opposition to providing meaningful information to parents regarding the bench marking of the individual students' and schools' performances is another issue that gets right up my nose.
But I digress.
I'll reply to your comments point by point:
1. OK. Point taken.
2. May be so, but parents (I have three kids) have to make a judgement whether the minimal supervision is enough, often after the teachers encourage the kids to go home. It's a moot point.
3. What study is that? One run by the Federation? One that's written in response to a survey of teachers? I don't have a problem with teachers trying to preserve their working standards and paint gloomy pictures to just how tough it is, but to portray that they have a workload to similarly qualified professionals in private industry is a joke, and an insult to the intelligence of the general population.
4. Granted.
Do I want the union movement to do nothing? Of course not! But the general populations view of unions is bleak, to say the least. The most telling poll of all is the decline in union membership:
Stupid industrial action that inconveniences the public will just alienate the unions and erode the considerable support that they've gained from intelligently putting across the message.
I'm interested to know just what pressure the Federation will add above and beyond other unions that will make us "need them in this struggle against Howard." A teachers' strike, perhaps? Boy, that will really worry Johnny! I'm sure he'd be more than happy to see it happen.
As for your second comment, I'll just make this point. The Federation has every right to fight tooth and nail for their members. However, the general public, in my experience, is severely unimpressed with some of the arguments they make to preserve what many see as pretty good working conditions.
Until teachers are willing to take workloads that are commensurate with private sector professionals, they will always lag in pay behind other similarly qualified people.
1. I'd like a dollar for every person who trumpets "I used to have a conscience when I was a union official or on the Labour Council".
2. The pupil free days are determined by the NSW Department of Education, not the Teachers' Federation. Rather than a 'perk' they are used by the DET to cover their backs by dumping enormous amounts of policy on teachers such as Child Protection, Hazardous Chemicals, etc etc. But then you'd have to be informed on the education debate to actually know that.
3. Have you ever read the Annual School Report from your kids' school? Or do they go to a private school? Public schools have had to produce these for years. They are very comprehensive and give overall results from Basic Skills Tests, the School Certificate Exam and the HSC. The info is out there now. What they don't do is rank schools which is a pointless task. All that does is disadvantage the already disadvantaged. Education also shouldn't be a supermarket for yuppies. We are a society not an economic rationalist's playground. What's the bet Duffy's kids are in private education anyway? The Teachers Federation is not protecting teachers here(although part of the new model is to publish teachers leave - sick, long service, family- which is disgraceful! Similar professionals have this done to them do they?). They are trying to maintain some community standards. We shouldn't return to that disgraceful Telegraph front page which ridiculed the HSC students at MT Druit High a few years ago. But then if you or Duffy had done any research you would know all about the actual substance of the debate on annual reports.
4."to portray that they(teachers) have a workload to similarly qualified professionals in private industry is a joke" You really display your ignorance here. Obviously you don't really know any teachers or what teachers actually do.
5. If the general public is "severely unimpressed with some of the arguments they(Teachers' Federation) make to preserve what many see as pretty good working conditions" it is because they are ignorant of the facts. The Federation fights hard to get the truth out but with the media run by the Duffy's of the world no wonder people like yourself remain ignorant on education issues.
Well, I can't help it if you think I'm not serious in my opposition to the Howard IR changes because I'm not now actively involved in a union.
The Federation makes a lot of noise when it's suggested that one day of a teacher's ample holidays be used for 'staff development' rather than disrupt thousands of working families by having them mid term.
I agree with you point about the Terror and the Mt Druit kids, and publishing teachers' leave. But a rankings table of some sort would not allow the government off the hook when it comes to extra funding for disadvantaged schools, as is now the case. Problems would be glaringly obvious. Parents have a right to know how their schools are performing in relation to other schools.
I actually know several teachers. They are good people and are dedicated at their job. But they don't work anything like the hours I do in private industry.
If Teachers really want better pay then they'll have to bargain away some of their conditions to gain greater efficiencies like nearly everyone else has over the past decade.
Tony - I agree with Nathan, you are showing ignorance toward the education debate. Teachers are extremely busy people. They generally start their day very early preparing materials for the days lesson. Teachers eat on the run as they are either on duty or in a meeting at lunch time. Teachers rarely leave school at 3.30pm and are generally still marking work till midnight.
You mention holidays, however if you talk to the teachers you claim to know then you will learn that holidays are spent at the computer either completing your children's assessments or preparing the next term's programs, which believe me takes hours upon hours.
Margo,
I think my arguments are adequately made in my replies to Nathan.
I reiterate, though, that pupil free days are a ridiculous perk that should be moved to school holidays, rather than mid term where they badly disrupt working families.