HANSARD EXTRACT
| Adjournment:
Workplace Relations: Boeing |
| 16 August 2005 |
Mr HAYES
(Werriwa) (9.09 p.m.)—Last
Wednesday I had the opportunity to meet with maintenance engineers
from Newcastle who are the subject of industrial action being taken
by their employer, Boeing. This is not the first time that this
matter has been drawn to the attention of the parliament and I am
sure that it will not be the last. In rising to lend my support to
the engineers at Williamstown, I acknowledge the hard work of the
member for Newcastle in standing up for the rights of these workers,
including their right to be represented by the Australian Workers
Union.
This dispute goes to the heart of concerns that
working Australians have about the government’s industrial relations
agenda. This is more than a dispute between a group of employees and
their employer. The engineers at Williamstown have already had a
taste of what is to come from the government’s industrial relations
agenda, as for the last four years they have been on individual
contracts. They are not simply taking a stand against the notion of
being on contracts. They have tried it, have found that it does not
work for them and have decided that they would prefer to be under a
collective agreement. Being on individual contracts, they have found
that every time the company makes a change in policy or procedure it
fundamentally and unilaterally changes their conditions of
employment.
I am sure that everyone was relieved to hear
the Prime Minister’s views on the matter last week when, in response
to a question from the Leader of the Opposition, he said:
….the existing law means that the company is within its rights in
taking the position it is taking. It is fair and proper, under the
existing law.
Everyone would have been relieved by that answer, as it gives some
insight into the future of industrial relations—at least in the way
John
Howard sees it. So much for assurances that employees will have a
choice. The minister keeps reminding the House that workers will be
able to elect to be on an AWA or, if they wish, they may negotiate
collectively and, indeed, through a union. However, that is not the
case for these employees at Boeing.
The Prime Minister continues to refuse to
guarantee that workers will not be worse off. He maintains that his
record is his guarantee. I have to say that people are starting to
treat his record in this regard very sceptically. We have an example
right here and now at
Newcastle. Boeing has been in Australia for a while and knows the
industrial relations system. It has no qualms in having its
employees at Bankstown under a collective agreement with the AWU as
the principal respondent, but it is another story at its
Williamstown site. We understand that the company is quite adept in
reading between the lines, particularly when it comes to currying
favour with the Howard government.
In fairness, what better way to maintain the
inside track when eyeing off Australian Defence Force contracts than
to embrace the government’s Holy Grail: the Prime Minister’s
personal ambition for the past 30 years to have workers forced onto
individual contracts. It is difficult to look at this dispute in any
other way. Boeing workers at
Bankstown, as I said earlier, are happily ensconced on a certified
collective agreement, while the workers at Williamstown are locked
out because of the company’s insistence that they be on Australian
workplace agreements. Either the company is suffering industrial
schizophrenia or it is displaying gross corporate hypocrisy at
levels not seen before in this country. Some might even go so far as
to suggest that Boeing is simply sucking up to the government to
prove its loyalty and improve its standing.
There has always been a resolution available
for this dispute. The employees at Williamstown agreed previously to
have all of their claims heard and determined on their merits by the
Australian Industrial Relations Commission, the country’s peak
industrial umpire. These are not militant people. The majority are
former RAAF personnel who have served their time protecting this
country. The last thing they want is to be involved in an industrial
dispute. They are skilled engineers who look after our fleet of FA18
fighters and all they want is a fair go. Interestingly, Boeing has
opposed the intervention of the industrial umpire and has shown its
preparedness to starve its employees—these former servicemen—and
their families into submission. I wonder what this company really
believes when it thinks of its employees, their families and the
community. Does this famous American icon see its workers only as
units of production? (Time expired)
Return
to Speeches Menu.
