The ACTU has released polling which finds that 53% of respondents believe that Tony Abbott would reintroduce WorkChoices under another name.
Abbott’s been addressing some business functions of late, no doubt because he has to build some bridges and mend some fences on economic issues, and raise some campaign dosh. It’s had nowhere near as prominent a part in reporting as his remarks on virginity and ironing, but I did notice that he’d been preaching the virtues of “flexibility” in industrial relations. No detail, but it’s not hard to deconstruct the message he’s sending.
Update: Via Andrew Reynolds in comments, a link to the poll.
Update: Abbott wants to scrap penalty rates and bring back statutory individual employment agreements.
I think we all know under Abbott that Workchoices would be well and truely back on the table. It’s the new conservative agenda, the eradication of the middle classes.
I expect this to be a huge part of Labor’s election campaign. They are gonna wedge him so hard he will need stitches in his buttcrack.
fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on you
Nope. Wont work twice I dont think. Workers are starting to realise the benefits of flexibility in the workplace. i.e part timers getting the sack in Vic, reduced hours as opposed to terminations in difficult economic periods etc…..
False dichotomy, Jamo. Workers have recognised the benefits of standardised wage and employment protections/conditions for decades. When Abbot says “flexibility”, that’s what people are thinking about.
Strange that reform of political funding has stalled as the polls are starting to trend against the ALP.
Is the ACTU prepared to pony up another $30 million over and above the direct funding of the ALP to keep Krudd in government?
Mark, do you have any extra info to hand about the methods etc. for ACTU polling? The open sentence sounds a bit like “Altria has published research which found 53% of people think smoking is cool”!
Or, to put it another way, can I respectfully suggest that your second para, in which you refer to the primary source of Abbott’s speeches – is a more compelling point than what some ACTU polling derived? I agree with you that all we need is to look at what Abbott is actually saying, and look at his policy history, to surmise what he’d do. An ACTU poll hardly adds new information, don’t you think?
Got the obligatory ‘rights at work’ email from the ACTU today. Gotta admit it is very hard to get enthused about it. Unions should be very, very nervous about the financial state of the ALP, union members should be very angry over the betrayal by Rudd and Gillard over the Fair Work Act, known as ‘Workchoices Lite’ by many in my union. It appears to me that the ALP is again going to use unions to finance an election. Similarly, the cynical Stephen Jones from the CPSU affiliated the union to the ALP against the wishes of members just to buy himself the seat of Throsby and contribute to the coffers of the ALP. The NSW Branch of the ALP takes donations from Telstra while one of the key NSW Right unions is locked in a protracted industrial campaign with Telstra. The timing of the whole ACTU Polling is extremely suspect and the continued relationship with a right wing, neoliberal ALP is highly questionable. The ALP will not get my vote and I will not be supporting the ACTU campaign again until we get some guarantees in writing on the restoration of workers rights.
Mercurius,
I would also add that, of that 53%, a reasonable percentage could be of the opinion that the re-introduction of WorkChoices may make them more likely to vote for the opposition. To me, this single statistic in a survey paid for by the peak body of the major funders of the ALP does not provide much in the way of useful information.
The only thing it does prove is that the ACTU is prepared to fund politically driven surveys paid for with union funds. Not news.
Dear Usual Suspects (You know who you are),
I am very interested in your ideas supporting the reintroduction of WorkChoices and would like to read your frank and full opinions on this interesting and important topic.
Yours faithfully,
The Marginal Voter.
@7 – Mercurius, the sample was 2099, which is a very good size. There doesn’t appear to be any information available publicly about questions.
But, the ACTU wouldn’t be paying a polling form good money just to generate a headline. There is no doubt that this would be part of the process of designing a campaign for this year’s election.
What’s significant about it, I think, is that it might remind people that WorkChoices could still be the elephant in the room, even if Tony’s all direct-action-y and bikeriding-ish.
Mark,
The ACTU have identified the sample as being of “working Australians”. Assuming that is correct, the usual ACTU code is that “working Australians” = union members. Again, if true, then I am staggered that the proportion is only 53%. Even if not, the sample would have been restricted by some arbitrary decision on what constitutes a “working Australian”, thus skewing the results.
I would strongly disagree that “the ACTU wouldn’t be paying a polling form good money just to generate a headline”. They have done this time and again to generate headlines. I cannot see that there was a point to this other than to attract publicity and try to help the ALP.
What other reason could there have been?
Andrew – you cannot question the motives of the ACTU. They are above politics and ethically and morally pure. Shame on you.
Andrew @ 12, it’s just as likely the ACTU commissioned it to pressure Rudd into rolling back the bits of Work Choices that have survived (by reminding him of why he won the last election).
Andrew, if you look at the link you’ve helpfully provided, the pollster says the sample is of “people in work”. It seems to me that you might be the one jumping to conclusions here.
I suspect their motive is what I said it is – to provide information that will be the basis for their own campaigning activities, and by releasing the results, to get the issue in the media as well.
It doesn’t actually matter what someone’s motive for a poll is if the thing is properly conducted and the questions reasonably posed. People can judge the questions for themselves based on the link.
Brumby in Victoria is pinning his electoral success in November on a functional MYKI [public transport ticketing system] I think MYKI which has been underdevelopment for 8+ years is one of those IT failures. 80% of IT systems fail. MYKI is one of those glorious failures that almost destroy the commissioning organisation.
Rudd needs to keep his Commonwealth electoral performance separate from Brumby, otherwise the mad Abbott will be in charge.
Does the ACTU have any credibility since Combet and Shorten joined Parliament and were silenced.
Direct link to the poll is here:
http://www.actu.org.au/Images/Dynamic/attachments/6873/ACTU%20final%20-050210-IRsummary.pdf
David,
You will forgive me, I hope, if I doubt that very much. The commentary around it makes no bones about being opposed to WorkChoices. “The Liberals” were also explicitly mentioned in 2 out of the three questions that were actually printed in the released results.
.
Mark,
How did they determine “people in work”? Judging by the numbers on page 4, they seem to have a reasonably balanced sample (possibly slightly underweight in Lib voters, but then there were fewer of them at the last election). Are “people in work” representative of the expected voters as a whole?
36% of the identified Lib/Nat voters also expected them to bring WorkChoices back. I am assuming that these poeople may actually have their enthusiasm for the Coalition increased by the prospect.
Finally, there must have been more questions than the ones in the release as the one to determine party affiliation (at least) is not there.
To me, this sort of poll gives us a few more questions than answers.
It does show, though, that the ACTU will be running in support of the ALP a scare campaign based on the big meanie “WorkChoices”.
Andrew, yes, I have no doubt more questions were asked to determine demographics and party affiliation, etc.
I don’t see much of a problem in restricting the sample to people in work. Presumably that’s the first question asked. They wouldn’t be representative of voters in general (particularly at the younger and older edges of the sample), but then, I suppose the ACTU is probably targeting its campaign at workers, and looking to identify messaging particularly effective for those in the workforce.
The ACTU is an umbrella organisation representing affiliated unions.
People who belong to unions are — wait for it — people in the workforce.
Why on earth would the ACTU, as an organisation representing unions whose members are people in the workforce, be particularly interested in the opinions of school children or retired persons or gurus who live in caves?
If the pollsters of the ACTU sought out the views of any or all of the above-mentioned groups, the ACTU’s affiliates would be well within their rights to ask for an explanation of a misuse of their membership funds.
Sympathisers of anti-Labor causes who complain about this methodology have perhaps been driven mad by grief.
Understandable, really.
Mark, one thing you can see coming out of Abbott on IR is a strong statement for something like a no diadvantage test if they go down the individual contracts route. That would be good policy anyway if they went hat way. The other option would be to keep award wages (i.e. penalties and overtime) but get rid of the other award terms, which would mean they could have a lot more flexibility, no AWAs and no removal of penalty rates and overtime. I’d be betting the latter!! It’s not rocket science – he could easily say fair and flexible, no kiddies being stopped from working after school etc etc
Andrew @ 18, I think you missed some of the nuance in my earlier comment.
@21, Corin, that’s plausible, but I suspect they’d be wise to be very wary indeed of mentioning anything that’s akin to AWAs.
Yes Corin, there is scope for Abbott to make a symbolic IR pitch that won’t scare the horses. Workchoices was a unique political moment. The union effort on it was huge – and they will not go near to repeating it for the next election.
Voters vote on current advertising campaigns – not on stuff back in the mists of time.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/abbotts-workplace-law-gamble-20100215-o2wd.html
The headline is more alarmist the policy it seems. I have been writing a piece on how the unions stop Labor getting to the centre-ground on IR as well as the Coalition being out of step. It is partly a response to Dean Mighell saying his union should leave the ALP.
I was going to try and publish it in the Oz or Online Opinion, but if you want to put it on LP, it would certainly create debate among your ranks.
Thanks, Corin – feel free to email me about this. mbahnisch at gmail dot com.
Corin, the Age report has Abbott seeming to advocate AWAs (aka “statutory non-union contracts”) and Bishop seeming to want to abolish penalty rates.
Update: Abbott wants to scrap penalty rates and bring back statutory individual employment agreements.
Update from today’s Age:
http://www.theage.com.au/national/coalition-pledges-not-to-remove-penalty-rates-20100216-o91m.html
Abbott to Minchin: Now look at the shit you’ve got me in!
OT:
billie writes that the MYKI ticketing “system” in Victoria
“has been underdevelopment…”
Considering the lengthy delays, and MYKI’s continued failure to be completed, billie’s minor typo is simply inspired and worthy of accolades, which I hereby bestow.
Comptroller of Accolades [Pedantry Division]
I think IR is more delicately poised than at any point since the 2004 election.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/scrap-minimum-shift-provisions-says-abbott/story-e6frgczf-1225831554534
I worked in the Uni bar at University for 2 hour shifts and it was perfect.
I think scrapping penalty rates will only be through a big demarcated no disadvantage test, meaning that the standard rate will rise. Personally this is politics Abbott could avoid and simply highlight strange outcomes in the awards being created, but I’m not convinced it is completely toxic, so long as the Libs can get their message out that people won’t be worse off well in advance of the obvious scare that will come. Will people believe them after WorkChoices?? well that’s the big question.
Corin, if the Libs said that the sun would rise tomorrow, I wouldn’t believe them until I’d observed it happening.