" Rudd Labor to take on the more extreme elements of the trade unions that have substantial power in the Labor Party."

The union movement has no power in the modern ALP. I cannot remember the last Labor politician who said anything about the workers. The unions didn't get their way in Fair Work Australia. Until the last election, the ALP hadn't campaigned on indistrial relations in years. Coincidentally, they had a hard time winning elections.

It is middle class trendies who need to be kicked out of the ALP. Go and form your own party and leave the ALP to the workers.

Dear readers;

The full version of Mighell's article has been published at the 'Left Focus' blog - and I welcome repsectful discussion - supportive and/or critical - here and there...

see:

http://leftfocus.blogspot.com/2010/02/alp-and-unions-where-to-from-here.html

nb: I've also written my own personal response to Mighell - and I'm hoping it will appear in On Line Opinion - and my blog 'Left Focus' soon.

Right here and now, though - I have some specific points to make:

* Rudd Labor promised no worker would be worse of under Award modernisation - For now this looks like it's not going to be the case... Personally I think some complexity is a reasonable price to pay for fairness.

* Pattern bargaining is a reasonable objective to prevent a 'race to the bottom' and Rudd Labor should never have compromised here.

* 'Militant unionism' is a great bogey - but the reality is that workers' share of the economic pie has been shrinking for decades; and the divisions in the labour market between 'haves' and 'have-nots' is getting greater and greater... This is the consequence of a weakened labour movement - afraid to take action when necessary or appropriate for fear of 'over the top' sanctions...

* That said - Corin's call for tax credits and a 'negative income tax' could be one way of ensuring no worker is worse off - but given the adminstration costs - what would the point be re: 'Award simplification' anyway under such circumstances? Maybe combine a negative income tax/tax credit with retained Award protections?

* Finally: It is simply not right to let the most poor and vulnerable workers 'take the brunt' of assaults on wages and conditions - the ACTU is completely right in seeking redress here - with the restoration in real terms of the wages and conditions of these people... It is a failure of common decency if there is resistance, here, from the Federal Labor government...

"The union movement has no power in the modern ALP"

Somehow, I don't think Morris Iemma would agree after the unions managed to get him booted from the NSW Premiership. Nor would Kevin Rudd privately: it is well known that he did a deal with the unions where he would get their support for the ALP leadership as long as he promised to scrap AWAs.

"Pattern bargaining is a reasonable objective to prevent a 'race to the bottom' and Rudd Labor should never have compromised here."

In actual fact, enterprise bargaining resulted in big increases to wages and productivity. So its pattern bargaining that makes most workers affected worse off, not better off.

"Militant unionism' is a great bogey - but the reality is that workers' share of the economic pie has been shrinking for decades"

Dean Mighell is living proof of militant unionism. Also, wages can only increase in profitable businesses. So the fact that wages have been increasing with profits is confirmation of the fact that profits are a precondition of real wage rises.

Labor is doing a pretty good job of remodelling itself as a progressive social democratic party. In so doing, they have ditched the socialist claptrap of the past.

The unions, on the other hand, have failed to remodel themselves and cling to old and thoroughly discredited ideologies. So, labor and the unions have nothing in common except two things - a shared history and a heap of ex-union hacks now sitting as Labor MPs.

The trade unions in Australia are, in general at least, on the way out. Any privileges granted them by the Rudd government won't stop their inevitable further decline. And good riddance to them. Labor can safely cut them adrift. They should do that and, in the process, take that last step in their transition to a thoroughly modern and broad-based party.

Hounian: Without the ability to defend wages and conditions through self-organisation; in the midst of an increasingly deregulated labour market - the 'demise' of unions would be to the detriment of workers.

A social democratic party does not necessarily HAVE to be 'labourist' in the British tradition of direct union affiliation. But the rights of workers - including their right to self-organisation - and support for the benefits of self-organisation - are VERY important to any genuine social demcocracy.

You pull out the 'socialist bogey' opposing social-democracy to socialism. But what is it exactly you're talking about? I consider myself a social democrat AND a liberal democratic socialist.

I believe in regulated labour markets: a strong minimum wage, and consistent and fair conditions in different sectors. I believe in a progressive tax-transfer system including strongly progressive taxation. I believe in a strong and fair welfare state and social wage: and in economic democracy purused via a variety of channels. I want to balance planning and markets: the private and public sector; and support for options such as mutualism and co-operativism.

There was a time when social democracy and socialism were taken as the same movement. World War One and the post-war Keynesian consensus saw the two opposed to each other.

But today I think is an opportune time for merger and interpentration of those traditions again.

The bottom line: What does social democracy mean to you? If it is emptied out of all progressive content - how is it recognisable as social democracy?

I think you need to specify what exactly you mean by social democracy.

As I said earlier - I am a liberal AND a socialist. But I think social democratic tradition has always been more ambitious in its approach to social justice than liberalism alone.

And anyway - your contempt for unions goes against even a genuine liberalism - which would recognise the rights of workers as related to the right to withdraw labour - and freedom of association.

Again - explain what social democracy is to you.

Hi, thanks for your comments. The piece is really a discussion starter rather than a final position that the ALP would likely get to. I take issue that removal of award conditions will make workers worse off, the retention of award wages is proposed (i.e. penalty rates and overtime) would stay. I am proposing a system that is far from a deregfulated market and the use of the tax system for creating better income distribution is nothing revolutionary, it is the social wage.