1998 AUSTRALIAN WATERFRONT DISPUTE

The 'Australian waterfront dispute of 1998' was a severe and protracted industrial relations dispute, primarily between the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) and Patrick Corporation, a stevedoring and transportation company led by chief executive officer Chris Corrigan. Patrick Corporation had the support of the Howard government, particularly the then Workplace Relations Minister Peter Reith. The dispute, which became the most contentious industrial relations dispute in Australia for many years, centred around attempts by Patrick and the Federal Government to improve efficiency on Australia's wharves, primarily by reducing worker entitlements and the power of the MUA. It also acted as a litmus test for the workings of the government's "new industrial relations" system.

Contents

Industrial relations legislation

Beginnings of the dispute

The Dubai experiment

A wider arrangement

Litigation

Resolution

Popular culture

References

External links

Industrial relations legislation

The Howard government, before being elected in 1996, had promised significant industrial relations reform. In January 1997 it substantially amended the ''Industrial Relations Act'', and renamed it the ''Workplace Relations Act 1996''. The stated aim of this legislation was to foster individual choice in workplace bargaining by reducing the powers of external organisations - particularly trade unions - to intervene. In addition to reducing the powers of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to arbitrate disputes, the Act also introduced individual employment contracts, known as Australian Workplace Agreements (or AWAs), into the Australian system. The watering down of collective bargaining provisions was a source of objection for many unions.

Beginnings of the dispute

Australian waterfront productivity had been an issue of concern since the 1980s. Patrick sought to improve productivity by creating redundancies and reducing overtime entitlements for its permanent employees, as well as hiring more contract employees on a casual basis.
After the legislative introduction of Australian Workplace Agreements, a number of stevedoring operators toyed with bringing individual contract workers into their workforces, but abandoned their plans in the face of strident union opposition.

The Dubai experiment

Investigations by media revealed that in December 1997, an Australian stevedoring company, Fynwest, had taken to hiring out-of-work Australian Defence Force personnel to work as stevedores under AWAs in Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates. The plans of the company were to either take these workers back to Australia or use the training program to train more. Intense criticism and the threat of industrial retaliation forced the company to cancel its plan.^[1]

A wider arrangement

On 8 April 1998, the Patrick Stevedoring Company made a startling and controversial decision to sack all its unionised workers and liquidate its assets (essentially becoming insolvent). As the media and general public were confronted with this development, it was claimed that the government had known about, and supported, this mass sacking.^[2]
The company cited lack of productivity and profit as the reason behind the sacking, as well as a desire to "clean up" the waterfront. They seized on the government's tentative ''Workplace Relations Act 1996'' as a means to do it.
However, when the media turned up at the docks the following morning, they discovered that the docks were fully operational, with a full staff installed - all with lower wages and fewer guarantees of working conditions. These workers had contracts with a different company - a company owned by the same people as the recently announced insolvent Patrick Corporation.
This matter was soon seized by the Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) as a plot to 'squeeze' them out of the workforce, part of the Howard Government's overall plan. They started an angry and vigorous campaign to have this matter brought to justice, and the case made its way to the High Court.

Litigation

The Patrick Stevedores v MUA High Court case upheld the substance of the decisions of the Federal Court of Australia, but with less onerous conditions on the administrators of the companies.

Resolution

The MUA and Patrick negotiated a new work agreement, which was adopted by the company and worked in June 1998. The agreement specified a near-halving of the permanent workforce through voluntary redundancies, the casualisation and contracting out of some jobs, smaller work crews, longer regular hours, company control over rostering, and productivity bonuses for faster loading. While the union retained the ability to represent maritime workers, the company achieved significant changes work practices as it desired. Workplace Relations Minister Peter Reith stated at the time "There appears to be a number of reforms which will satisfy the seven benchmark objectives which is very important."^[3]

Popular culture

The waterfront dispute was the subject of the 2007 miniseries ''Bastard Boys''.

References

1. Howard linked to Dubai plan,The Age, 8 May 1998 (accessed 14 January,2007)
2. Waterfront Dispute,Corporate Law Electronic Bulletin, May 1998 (accessed 14 January,2007)
3. http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/cib/1998-99/99cib01.htm#CON

External links

★ Workplace Relations Act 1996

★ AustLII page with links to court decisions

★ Outline of the Waterfront Dispute - Part 1 Australian Parliamentary Library

★ Outline of the Waterfront Dispute - Part 2 Australian Parliamentary Library

★ Takver's Soapbox - War on the Wharfies (independent site in support of the unions)

★ [1](an account, sympathetic to the MUA, published by the Brisbane Defend Our Unions committee in 1998)