Power tilts to unions in maritime sector

Australia's national security interests provide a serious reference point that brings groups together and drives towards required outcomes.

In recent months, there has been rising concern about union positioning and power in the Western Australian maritime sector, and how this could affect Australia’s national security objectives under AUKUS (Australia, United Kingdom, United States nuclear submarines agreement).

Firstly, I must declare my positive experience with union representatives in my workplaces.

Never has a day of work been lost, owing to a relationship built on clear communication, trust and a shared understanding that our combined success is good for all.

I remain a staunch believer in Australia’s freedom of association laws, ensuring no-one should be disadvantaged due to their affiliation, or not, with a union. This is an ethical position easy to support.

I understand the value of a group of unified voices, particularly when standing up against unsafe practices or working conditions that take advantage of others.

Unions have value and importance in upholding this ethical balance.

The current concerns brought to me, however, indicate a possible departure from that position, generating considerable angst.

WA industry points to the South Australian shipyards, where reports of bullying and harassment from unions to non-union members are prevalent but impossible for me to verify.

Other tactics deployed include rolling strike actions and unofficial actions such as increased absenteeism, all affecting productivity and output.

The task that is in front of Australia’s shipbuilding sector is time sensitive.

It will represent a significant challenge in workforce development, retention and capacity.

To have productivity under threat is an unacceptable addition to the list.

It is likely the unions are aware of the bargaining position it creates.

While correct in seeking to ensure safe workplaces, good working conditions and appropriate levels of Australian worker employment, fears remain they do not share the higher purpose.

The Australian Shipbuilding Federation of Unions is likely to be the key player, comprising of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, the Australian Workers Union, Electrical Trades Union, Professionals Australia and the Communications, Electrical, Energy and Plumbing Union in South Australia.

Complicating matters is the context within which this occurs.

The Albanese government has passed multi-enterprise bargaining laws, which expand the reach of unions into small and medium businesses and, in my opinion, are likely to limit productivity-lifting sub-contract support from other sections of the same industry, reinforcing union power.

Furthermore, at Labor’s recent national conference, and perhaps to deflect away from growing conflict in the room over AUKUS, the prime minister promised 20,000 “wellpaid union jobs” via the trilateral arrangement.

Some unions are raising concerns about nuclear waste disposal, a valid point, but this further strengthens the negotiating position of the ASFU.

It has the positioning, the promise and the power.

Given the importance of the timeframe, it is reasonable to wonder who will pay for the potentially excessive financial elements of a future workplace agreement.

Industry has raised with me the concern that if no pre-contract position is reached, the escalation in costs due to union action, post-contract, will be borne by one of two parties.

Either the major contractor, which will be reluctant to cut into reasonable margins, or the supporting contractors, typically SMEs, which don’t have the capacity to wear the extra cost post-contract.

It is imperative the Commonwealth steps in to prevent this union issue affecting national security and being potentially debilitating for industry.

The obvious answer is to incentivise all parties towards the common goal.

Cost control is vital but timeline is perhaps more pressing.

The Commonwealth should offer pay regimes, directly or through contractors, that reward productivity and output.

In doing so, well-paid union jobs are delivered, Defence has the capability it requires, and industry is not left carrying the burden.

The government has delivered the promise and the power to the unions, and now it must participate and deliver for all parties.

What remains true is that workers deserve safety and fair conditions. Defence needs capability. Defence businesses need to remain profitable.

Shared goals and shared success are the only way forward.

• Kristian Constantinides is the general manager of Airflite, and chairperson of AIDN-WA; the opinions expressed are purely his own