Was WorkChoices good for union membership?

As the ABS reported yesterday, trade union membership experienced a rare increase in absolute numbers in 2008, up by more than 3%. While growth in public sector numbers, as The Age notes, explains a good proportion of this, many industries which have low public sector involvement also enjoyed strong increases (though union membership continued to decline in many industries as well).

Though WorkChoices made it harder for unions to access workplaces to recruit, the overall policy framework of WorkChoices should have been a positive for unions. As Michael Warby has long argued (most recently in the Autumn 2009 issue of Policy; available in newsagents) government setting of wages and conditions is bad for unions, because it delivers improvements to workers without them having to employ unions to bargain on their behalf. A policy that reduces the power of tribunals and increases the rights of employers should therefore be good for unions, because it gives workers a reason to employ them to negotiate better wages and conditions.

Labor’s partial resurrection of a regulation-based approach to industrial relations should therefore be a net negative for union membership, even though the system overall is good for union officials in giving them more rights and powers than they had under WorkChoices.

Whether this will translate into a reversal in union membership next year is hard to say. There are at least two factors working in favour of union membership increasing, in improved access by unions to workplace and a business cycle shift in power away from employees towards employers. For employees, this makes union membership a more attractive investment. On the other hand, the sheer scale of job loss will make an absolute increase in union membership unlikely, even if the % of workers who are union members increases.

One thought on “Was WorkChoices good for union membership?

  1. Interesting thoughts, Andrew.
    I believe that one day we will regret the death of the trade unions – and I am pretty sure they are close to death.
    Their decline is their own fault. For many years in many industries union membership was just about compulsory. When that ceased to be, unions did not know how to earn membership. They did not have a service that people were willing voluntarily to pay money for.
    It was very much like the way businesses used to being cossetted in a regulated industry find it difficult to survive when they lose protection.
    They do not know how to get and keep customers. (So many spend much of their energy trying to hold onto the monopoloy power they have, rather than learning how to do business under the news rules.)
    I have heard union officials talk to members the way no company manager would: “When I tell you to get out on the effing grass, you’ll get out on the grass or you will never work in this effing industry again”.
    (“on the grass” meant walking off the job.)
    Teated like that, I can’t imagine many would voluntarily stay in a union.
    But, somehow, it seems a pity that unions have destroyed themselves in this way. Collective bargaining was part of the fabric of industry for a long time and I am not sure that we will be better without it.
    One day, I must expand these thoughts into an article…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s